. ' m "'.''. ' ..... 1 .: '--' 1 :;. . -' ' -' ' . 1 '"' 1 ' ; ' H i ... Hi '.. THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESENTED BY PROF. CHARLES A. KOFOID AND MRS. PRUDENCE W. KOFOID H < m W-.^ 5 m '. :." ' -t / \ THE RECONCILIATION OF RELIGION AND SCIENCE BEING ESSAYS ON IMMORTALITY, INSPIRATION, MIRACLES, AND THE BEING OF CHRIST BY THE REV. T. W. FOWLE, M.A. VICAR OF ST LUKE'S, NUTFORD PLACE, LONDON LONDON: HENRY S. KING & Co, 65 CORNH1LL AND 12 PATERNOSTER ROW 1873 [All rights reserved.} TO THE VERY REV. A. P. STANLEY, D.D. DEAN OF WESTMINSTER WHOSE FEARLESS AND CONSISTENT LIBERALISM MAKES HIM THE FRIEND OF ALL LIBERAL CLERGYMEN, IS D ED 1C A TED, PREFACE. OEEING that more than half the differences of opinion S^ in philosophy and theology are due to the use of words in different senses, it may be well to define in what sense the words " religion " and " science " are used in this volume. It is, I may say, the popular, ordinary, and quite intelligible sense which they commonly bear indeed, in my opinion, the general public has often a better reason for, and more method in, its use of language than the wise men who are for ever setting it to rights. Science is simply the process by which mankind derives knowledge from reason- ing about facts. (Occasionally I may have used the word in its more restricted sense of " natural " science i.e., that department of knowledge which deals with physical facts.) Religion is the word that describes the relations of man with the power or being whom we call God. Now the quarrel between these two has hitherto consisted in this. Science affirms that nothing is to be regarded as true except that which can be proved by rational argu- ments addressed to reasonable beings, founded upon facts capable of analysis and verification. I say that science affirms this, because no one who knows anything of the real tendency of positive thought, as seen in its ablest representatives, can permit himself to doubt what the mean- ing of science is now, and what it will teach the world vi Preface. hereafter. Two things alone it postulates the existence of mind and the existence of matter as ultimate incompre- hensible facts ; why these are, and in what sense they are, incomprehensible, Mr Herbert Spencer will explain to all who care to inquire. Religion, on the contrary, has been made to assert that there are some things which must be taken for granted upon some authority or other, some explanations which must be received although the words which convey them do not represent any actual facts that have been submitted to consciousness. Hence an ill-omened alliance has been struck between theology and the intui- tional philosophy ; and furthermore, the conclusions of science even in the field of physical fact have been sub- jected to a rash and irritating opposition in the interests of what was believed to be religious truth. Scientific men, on the contrary, have accepted this view of religion with too great readiness, and taking their opponents at their word, have been content that this antagonism should be regarded as real and permanent. Thus in their minds the two words represented two alien tendencies of thought the one old, intuitional, theological, and destined to pass away; the other new, positive, founded upon experience, and destined to prevail. And being strong in the growing discovery of law and truth, they have disdained the ill-judged, tempor- ising, and insincere offers of reconciliation which their opponents, goaded from time to time by their fear of the force of facts, have been making to them. The mode of reconciliation suggested in this book consists in the absolute unconditional surrender of the province of religion to the methods of scientific investigation. And whatever else it may show, this at least is clear, that it is Preface. vii possible for the same man to hold the Christian Creed and yet to belong to the empirical school of thought, and to accept every scientific conclusion which those who are entitled to be heard declare to be established. If the origin of life or the genesis of man seem at all uncertain, it is not because I have the faintest religious partiality one way or another ; but because, by common confession, there remains yet much to be explained and accounted for. My only feeling in the matter is to hope that this may be accom- plished as soon as possible, in order that religion may have another fact upon which to exercise herself, and so to draw nearer to the mind and will of God. The way in which this reconciliation is worked out appears in the Essays themselves, but admits, like all simple truths, of being succinctly stated. Knowledge is derived from facts by reason this is the basis of science. The knowledge of God is derived primarily from historical facts this is the basis of religion. These facts, it must however be remarked parenthetically, are not the only means, but the first or only direct means of knowing God. They give us the clue whereby we may then trace the mind and operations of God in all nature, all history, and all religions. We do not confine (God forbid ! ) the sphere of the divine working to a few almost isolated (so called) supernatural events, but we take these events, or rather the history that contains them, as helping us to under- stand how God works in the history of mankind, in the soul of men, in the universe itself. And we affirm that without some such clue, without, that is, facts to go upon, all belief as to the nature, being, and will of God must be and has been the merest guesswork, beautiful indeed and useful, as viii Preface. bearing witness to man's unconquerable instinct to search after God, but never practical to the vast mass of men, and now doomed to extinction before the onward progress of scientific thought. The kind of demonstration by which facts are proved, varies, of course, in the different branches of knowledge in religion, being historical, it consists of human evidence. Now, no human evidence taken by itself can prove the interven- tion of God in history as any natural or ordinary fact of history is proved. The evidence will be received or rejected, according as the knowledge of God which it purports to con- vey does or does not meet the moral cravings and religious wants of those to whom it is addressed. The time may come, must indeed come, when the minds of men will be made up on the whole in one of two directions ; at present every man must do his best to justify to himself the grounds upon which his belief or his unbelief is founded. Meanwhile both parties ought to acknowledge that in the present state of knowledge there is much to be said on both sides ; both ought to abstain from irritating and contemptuous language ; both ought to rest content with the assurance that truth will ultimately prevail ; and finally, both ought to join in cordial alliance against any school of thought or of religion which, by means of intuitions incapable of analysis, or of authority transcending reason, or of facts independent of verification, seeks to hinder rigid scientific method in its inquiry after truth. It will be observed, I hope, that I have taken pains throughout this volume not to mention (with a mere chance exception here and there) the names of living theologians, and to allude as little as possible to the individual opinions Preface. ix of any of them. I have desired to call attention to a new method of regarding the opposition between religion and science, and not to engage in the passing controversies of the day. Moreover, it is quite possible to entertain the highest esteem for theological writers while utterly repudi- ating the system of which they are the supporters, and to which they cannot, owing to mere stress of circumstances, avoid belonging. So, while restraining myself from attacking individual opinions, I have put no restraint whatever upon the expression of my dislike for the metaphysical theology which constitutes modern orthodoxy. The subjects treated are what may fairly be termed the primary elements of religion. These are God, or that which comes before our experience ; immortality, or that which comes after it ; and the means, whether actions or thoughts, by which God communicates with man that is, miracles and inspiration. Subjects like the Atonement, Prayer, the Sacra- ments, the Church, occupy a secondary or derivative position, and are not therefore touched upon except by occasional allusion. Yet these, too, are susceptible of strictly scientific treatment, which has indeed in one case been successfully employed. Mr Macleod Campbell's book on the Atone- ment derives its now acknowledged value from the simple fact that its doctrine is based upon the experience of human nature, and upon certain historical events assumed and believed to have actually occurred. Surely it is time, judging from recent controversies, that the great subject of Prayer was similarly treated. I feel compelled to apologise for the brevity, and conse- quent obscurity, of the first Essay on Inspiration, the more so as by it more than by any other the success of the "recon- x Preface. ciliation " will be tested. It may fairly be said that the very title suggests a book rather than an essay, and requires a large historical induction. I might of course reply that this is a mere sketch to be filled up, or a first attempt to be followed out, as occasion might serve. But apart from personal considerations that are not favourable to any extensive literary undertaking, there is, I think, a very sufficient reason why the time for such an undertaking has not yet come. There are, in point of fact, no scientific data sufficient to carry us much further than I have gone. We are still almost entirely in the dark as to the origin, growth, and nature of the human faculties. What that was in Handel which made him a musician is still as unknown as the in- spiration which made St Paul discern the meaning of Christ's religion or St Theresa live its life. But the definite assertion, that religious inspiration is just as much, or just as little, capable of explanation as any other human faculty, is surely a not unimportant step in the right direction. In the same way I have maintained that the actions of God called miracles can be just as much and just as little ex- plained that is, in their real essential nature as such ultimate truths as the following : The origin of the universe, the being of God, the nature of law, the correlation of mind and matter. There is nothing whatever specially incom- prehensible in any miracle, though there may be much that is incredible. We must therefore remit the case to the tribunal of posterity, that High Court of Appeal in all matters that cannot be verified by absolute demonstration. But it must never be forgotten that we ourselves are not the first court that has tried this cause. However we explain the fact, the fact remains, that Christianity under Preface. xi many disadvantages withstood the first great wave of cri- tical and scientific thought in the eighteenth century. And it withstood it merely because the common-sense of man- kind arrived, rightly or wrongly, at the conclusion that the events that give to Christianity its claim upon human allegiance really occurred. I have added an Essay upon the Church and the Work- ing Classes written some years ago, to remind my readers that the questions started in this book are no mere matters of theological speculation, but concern intimately the future history of this country, and the present welfare and future des- tiny of the Working classes, to whom that history belongs. The publication of this book coincides with the period at which the fortunes of Liberal Christianity in the Church of England seem to have declined to their lowest ebb. It is not that there are no Liberal writers and workers, but that, to all outward appearance, they have failed to reach the mass of religious thought, sentiment, and action that lies embedded in the heart of the " common people." Not to mention the names of living men (in speaking of whom I could not claim the grace of impartiality), the Church of England has within one generation produced three men who, if nobility of spirit and originality of mind go for anything, might have been expected to have begun the new reformation by bringing home to the hearts of men the new truths that are in the air around us. Seldom, indeed, has reform been presented to mankind in a guise so attractive, by men so indescribably winning, as by these three, Arnold, Robert- son, and Maurice. Differing in much, they were alike in this, that they were Englishmen to the backbone. Side by xii Preface. side with them was started the Catholic movement. It was alien to all dominant English traditions and sentiment ; it has produced no great names since the first generation, the leading minds of which showed their appreciation of their position by deserting the Church of their fathers for the communion held in the utmost dislike by the English nation. Yet at this moment it has absorbed to itself all that is most vital and practical in the religion of English Churchmen, and dominates within the Church of whose tra- ditions and history it does not now seem capable of forming a conception. The reaction triumphs all along the line. The causes of the success of the Tractarian movement are easily discovered, as must always be the case with movements essentially superficial, retrogressive, and non- permanent. I am not concerned with them further than to observe that they are to be traced more or less directly to the decay of Evangelical religion, while as yet there was nothing to satisfy the hunger of men's souls for a definite system of religious belief and practice. But the question, Why has Liberal theology hitherto failed to all outward appearance, and in all outward operations? requires a single word of explanation. To begin with, no Liberal can possibly admit that the failure is anything but in appearance and not in reality. Sooner or later, whether by slow approximation or by sudden convulsion, the Christianity of England will be drawn towards those views of God's will, His relations with man, man's duty to God and to his fellows, which these three writers were among the first to teach. This at times seems evident even to the most determined of the Re- actionists ; it accounts for that strange uneasiness, that Preface. xiii defiant obstructiveness, that vehement passionateness, which they are wont to display even in the hour of seeming victory. Nor is it difficult to perceive the causes which have hindered hitherto the outward success of the Liberal movement. The time is not yet fully come. The really important and interesting thing is, however, to realise clearly in what sense these three men have not failed but succeeded, and how they have accomplished the work to which they were sent. The process through which those vital religious changes called reformations seem in part to pass is something of this sort. Prescient minds discern something false, con- tradictory, non-human, immoral, in the opinions or practices of contemporary religion ; they see that the best life of the world is becoming alienated from religious belief. Tokens of a coming storm are everywhere in the air, and yet none can tell from what quarter it will burst or what direction it will take. Then these minds set themselves, by a necessity arising from their personal reaction from popular religion, to re-state and re-establish for themselves and for the world the primary truths of all religion. This was accomplished by the first generation of Liberal English Churchmen, the popular mind meanwhile, as was only natural, going back, in the general break-up of traditionary opinions, to the oldest and most positive authorities it could find. It was not the business of men like the three I have mentioned to lay down the exact relations of religion towards that spirit of the age called science, which was beginning to assail almost like an intellectual storm the oldest convic- tions, traditions, and institutions of the world. To them, as to Samuel, Savonarola, and above all Wickliffe, belonged xiv Preface. the far nobler task of laying the roots of religion so deep in the heart of man, of recommending it so forcibly to his intellectual and moral needs, that when the storm burst and beat upon the house it should stand and not fall, because it was founded upon a rock. If, then, at this moment everywhere men are yearning for a religion, are admitting that it is essential to humanity, are seeking for it by every available and unavailable route, if, moreover, religion is able to hold her own as a power that must be acknowledged and that cannot be destroyed, it is due to the writings of these three Englishmen, and others like them. They are doing the work of WicklirTe over again ; for England, let her detractors say what they will, is ever the " mother of originality." I declare, after attentive study, that there is more of the vital essence of religion, more to convince us of its spiritual necessity, more life, hope, spiritual brightness, and energy in Mr Maurice's commentary on St John, than in all the German com- mentaries on the same book with which at any rate I am acquainted put together. To the High Church party belongs the immense credit of having kept religion as a power and a reality before the mass of the people, alike by what they have done and have stimulated others into doing. To the Liberals, who are not a party but a school of thought, belongs the more abiding credit of having implanted even in the scientific intelligence of mankind the idea of the in- destructibility of the worship of the Lord God Almighty. For a guess at the future course of events let us go to a parable taken from history. Never was failure more absolute, never did extinction itself seem more close at hand, than when the last man of the last English army died Preface. xv round the last of the English kings upon the fatal field of Hastings. And in a sense this was true ; the old England lay dead with those dead warriors, the new England was yet to rise from their graves. Pass a few years, and the old saying is found once more to be true, " Anglia victa cepit victores." Not by victories, nor revolutions, nor heroic actions, but merely by the process of gradual absorption, by the strength and flexibility of the English nature, nay, by the very act of submitting to the inevitable and acknow- ledging the supremacy that could not be gainsaid in short, by treating facts and laws as though they were facts and laws, the English character leavened, transformed, and finally assimilated the vital elements in the character of the conquering race. Through what years of patient suffering, through how prolonged an agony of silent evolu- tion, this took place, there are few records to explain to us. But the genius of historical insight has flashed a ray of light upon the lives of Englishmen during this period, and in the character of Cedric the Saxon (to me, for reasons that I now comprehend, always specially attractive) we catch a glimpse of the process by which England in the hour of defeat was slowly becoming England once more. And that the ancient spirit lived on, producing new hopes with- out itself daring to hope, is due to the men whose memories kept alive the pride and name of the English race, and whose glory and whose works became the property of vanquished and vanquisher alike. The men who fell at Hastings were in sober truth the spiritual ancestors of the ENGLISH barons who confronted the tyrant on Runnymede, of the archers who let fly their shafts at Agincourt, of the sailors who " did their duty " at Trafalgar, of the grey xvi Preface. horsemen who " rode so terribly " at Waterloo. Ah ! but the story of the Cross, in all its essential meaning, has been repeated in the lives of may a warrior, whether of the sword or of the pen, who has fallen on the field of battle as de- feated but not destroyed, as dying and behold he lives. The application of our parable is easy. The hour is coming when upon the field of intellectual controversy the army of science will storm the last stronghold of religion regarded from the intellectual side. Reason will conquer for herself the kingdom which, even in the act of admitting the inevitable result, it seems so hard to believe can really belong to her. But " magna sunt facta et praevalebunt." The methods, the assumptions, the opinions, the dogmas, the creeds of Christendom, will pass under the yoke of scientific inquiry, and will continue to exist only so far as science permits and approves. And with the death of the old theology will begin the new religion, just as when the Norman soldiers sat down on English soil to eat their meal on the night of victory, there began then and there that process which was to make them more English than the English themselves. In this sense, and this is what men really mean by the assertion, there can be no permanent contest between religion and science : at the moment of victory the spell of the spiritual power of religion begins to weave its influence round minds that have been forced by circumstances into an intellectual antagonism. Once again, by mere process of assimilation, by the spirit of patient endurance, by the memory of great names and deeds, by the instinctive clinging to the essential ideas of religious humanity, by breathing the old spirit into words that sound so harshly in the ear of the vanquished, by sheer strength Preface. xvii of character and positive determination to exist, by the power of numbers, by the grace of prayer, by the imperious craving for unity, religion will live again amidst the forms, the methods, and the dogmas of science. How this Recon- ciliation of Religion and Science will come about we know not, any more than we know how a corn of wheat if it fall into the earth and die brings forth much fruit. It may be in this way or in that way, by this man or by that man, or by no way at all that we can see, and by no man of whose name we could make special mention ; all we can say for certain is, that it will be accomplished by the application of rigorous scientific method to the subject of religion in the first instance, and the infusion of religious spirit into the mind and method of science in the second. To have made an attempt in this direction is the claim of this otherwise unpretending book. It is an endeavour to carry on the traditions received from the founders of Liberal Theology in England, and to harmonise the religious truths they derived from nature, history, the Bible, and the soul of man, with scientific thought. And if there be nothing in its arguments to bring about, there is, I will venture to say, nothing in its spirit to retard, that reconci- liation which every man desires who believes that because Unity is the Being of God, it is therefore the prize of reason and the crown of humanity. May I add that some such thought as this crossed my mind as, a year ago, I turned aside from the grave of Maurice ? Therein had just been laid all that was mortal of my dear friend and teacher ; but the immortal spirit was stirring in the hearts of those who stood around, so that one of them was fain to exclaim, "What life there is here!" b CONTENTS. PARE THE DIVINE CHARACTER OF CHRIST, ... i SCIENCE AND IMMORTALITY, . ... 22 MORALITY AND IMMORTALITY, ..... 48 CHRISTIANITY AND IMMORTALITY, , . . .86 RELIGION AND FACT, . , . , . . 118 THE MIRACLES OF GOD, . . . . 151 THE MIRACLES OF MAN, - . . . 183 A SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNT OF INSPIRATION, . . . 220 THE INSPIRATION OF THE JEWS, ..... 256 THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE,. .... 288 THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST AND MODERN THOUGHT, . . 325 THE CHURCH AND THE WORKING CLASSES, . . . 360 THE RECONCILIATION OF RELIGION AND SCIENCE. THE DIVINE CHARACTER OF CHRIST. NO one, I think, can doubt that the question of the historical truthfulness of the New Testament that is, of the personality of Jesus Christ is being tried before us, and will be decided by our children ; nor is it possible for any candid person to say what the result of the conflict may be, no matter how firm his own persuasion and faith. We cannot foresee the exact influence of the result of scientific discovery upon the religious faith of the future ; it may quench the possibility of belief in the divine inter- position under the overwhelming pressure of a changeless law of evolution, front the time when this globe was a chaos of nebulous matter, or it may compel men to fall back upon the belief in the divine mission of Christ as the one means of escape from a law more horrible than anarchy itself. But it is clear that once more men will be brought face to face with the deepest questions of religious belief; and it is melancholy, indeed, to notice the absolute ignorance of popular religionism, and its popular leaders, as to the true nature of the approaching crisis. That Mr Darwin's last book should surprise the religious A 2 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. world in the midst of a hot fight about articles and rubrics, disestablishment and vestments, is sadly ominous of the result of the battle. Now, one advantage at any rate, one consequence of a real crisis, is that it clears the ground, divides men into two distinct armies, sets before them a worthy object of contention, appeals to manly virtues, and calls forth a robust and clear-sighted faith. Such a time is especially fatal to a class of thinkers whom I shall not attempt to describe, because I am conscious that I have not sufficient sympathy with them to enable me to do them justice. These are sentimentalists, idealists, moralists, to whom the goodness or the beauty of Christianity are dear, but who emancipate themselves from the necessity of believing it as a record of actual events displaying a divine purpose. They act the part of neutrals in keeping well with both parties and, like neutrals when war breaks out, they run no small risk of being effaced. Their voice is silenced when once the great debate is opened, and men de- mand with vehement determination a simple answer to a plain question " Are these things true, or are they not ? Did they happen, or did they not ? Answer, yes or no." Now the purpose of this essay is to examine one of the pleas by which, as it seems to me, honest men desire unconsciously to evade answering this question either to their own minds or to those of other people. We are constantly told that the character and teaching of Christ, even if everything else perished, would be a sufficient basis for a distinctive Christian creed, and, I suppose, for a defined Christian Church. Everything is staked upon His moral perfection. I propose, therefore, to examine, The Divine Character of Christ. 3 by an appeal to the facts of the case, how far this is true. Without attempting to establish distinct propositions, the general course and tenor of my argument will be as follows : That the biography was never intended, and is manifestly inadequate, for the purpose of setting forth a character merely for criticism, admiration, and imitation : that there is in this character itself a distinctly divine or non-human element, as much so as are the miracles among His actions, the personal claims amidst His teaching, and the Resurrection in His life : that this element, both as a matter of fact and of right, calls for worship on our part, as well as, or rather than mere imitation : that it is far more difficult to believe in the possibility of a perfect character existing in an ordinary man, than to believe in the historical personality of Jesus Christ : that the character is not separable from, and can only be explained by, or be possible to, His personality, and vice versd ; ancl that thus the two are not distinct inlets to the Christian faith, the one prior in time or in experience to the other, but, as it were, folding-doors, giving us a wide, easy, and simultaneous access thereunto. At the outset, however, I am confronted by an enor- mous danger. Although it is clear to myself that my argument, though close to, is nevertheless entirely outside the limits of the well-worn controversy as to the identity of divine and human morality, yet I am equally sure that there will be an almost irresistible tendency in the mind of my readers to raise that question. In the hope, then, of some- what stemming this tendency, I hasten to affirm my belief that the life of Christ is the revelation of divine goodness in man ; that the idea, though not the capacity of good- 4 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. ness, is everywhere the same : that man has therefore an inherent power of judging goodness, call it divine or human, wherever it appears, by the unchanging laws of right and wrong. But then it seems to me self-evident that a divine being conscious of himself will, by virtue of the very same laws, act differently and have some different qualities from ordinary men. Given the same laws and forces of morality, and a different person in his origin and self-consciousness, and the result must be a variation in character and conduct. Hence, too, it follows that this variation may be the object, as I have said, of worship rather than of imitation. Only I must here seize the opportunity of pointing out how desirable it is to remem- ber that words such as divine, superhuman, worship, perfection, goodness, and the like, from seeming to ex- plain and to signify more than they really do, have a most confusing tendency, against which it is necessary to guard by keeping steadily before our minds facts, and things, and events. Two instances showing the need of this have already occurred in this present essay. I use the word Personality in respect of Christ, as wishing to avoid all controversy upon His essential divinity or re- lations to the Father, and simply as expressing that historical account of Him in which He is represented as being free from human sin in His birth, and from human corruption in His death. Personality would thus mean what a man is by virtue of powers, such as the paternal, apart from himself; and character what he is by virtue of his own self-determination inherent in himself. And, again, when I speak of a character as calling for worship rather than imitation, I define worship to be the desire of The Divine Character of Christ. 5 the creature to be like the Creator, accompanied by the consciousness of its own imperfection and powerlessness. We turn now, then, to see what the character of Christ really is in the light of simple facts. The essence of the revelation of God to us has come in the form of a biography beyond all doubt the most suitable for teaching morality. The history of a life affects most powerfully our moral nature by the example proposed, the sympathy evoked, the light shed upon the inner workings of humanity, above all, by the necessity imposed of using our moral discernment to decide upon the character and conduct of its hero. Now it is surely a mere matter of fact that the life of Christ is presented to us in a form very different from those of other men, and very imperfectly fulfilling these conditions, though certainly fulfilling them in part. We may throughout this argument usefully compare the history of St Paul, though I shall leave it for the most part to be done mentally. That history resembles the history of Christ in being to a large extent in its materials autobiographical, and in having been compiled by the same man. And it must be a source of unceasing wonder that St Luke should have been able to draw two portraits of two on any view of the greatest persons that ever existed, without for one moment confusing the outlines, or portraying the smallest essential resemblance, or leaving upon his readers the least identity of treatment and effect, or placing them for one moment upon a level of power and goodness. The character of Christ is a mere outline. Though, by the hypothesis which I am controverting, His character as a human being is the sole ultimate evidence for His divinity, 6 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. or for whatever view men take of His person ; yet the ac- count of it is so short and undefined as to be proof against ordinary criticism. There are no letters, nothing about His personal appearance, next to nothing of His inner feelings and thoughts, no record of His opinions upon science, art, philosophy, history, literature, and metaphysics. St Paul, on the contrary, lives before us, his bodily presence weak and contemptible, his letters weighty and powerful, the agitations of his inner life, loves, hopes, fears, plans, specula- tions, all engraven in living characters. Painting St Paul, you paint a real man ; painting Christ, you reproduce the ideal of the artist, or the age, or the nation. And His life appears to have had just the same effect upon those who saw it as upon those who read it. With an exception to be mentioned, they make no direct allusions to His char- acter as an object of imitation. What possessed their souls and filled their imagination was not sympathy with His character, but admiration and worship of His person. They built their faith, not upon His perfection, but upon His birth, which was to them the love of God ; His death, which was to them the goodness of the Son of God ; His Resurrection, in which they saw the power of God over evil ; the Ascension, in which they felt the power of the Son of God for good over the world. They never attempted to prove that lie was perfectly good by explaining His actions or defending His conduct, nor have they left any materials by which we can do so. They took all this for granted, and thus gave to His life that divine suggestive- ness by which we can, and must, attach all our ideas of moral perfection to Him, not find them complete in Him. This is that perfection which He too claimed "Which of The Divine Character of Christ. 7 you convinceth me of sin ? " which, the moment we begin to think of it, fades away into infinity, loses itself in God. It presents to us not a character to be analysed, but a life to be lived, and that lives in us. It is not merely that He is far removed from us and above us ; so also is St Paul, who seems nearer to Christ than we to him. But then we are, so to speak, in the same plane as St Paul, and can see the steps that lie between us and him ; whereas, around Christ there is a vacant space, across which no man may in this life tread, and in which the desire for mere imitation ceases and dies ; and an instinct of His greatness and our weakness constrains us to cry, " My Lord and my God ! " And this is on the whole a description of the effect of His life upon those who knew Him best. Not, certainly, that it found vent in the mere bare assertion that He was God for that in so many words they never said. But they spoke of Him with reverent reticence, as men who struggle with thoughts too big for them, tending to conclusions that defy the power of language. Contrast, for instance, the awkward, incoherent utterance of St Paul " He thought it not robbery to be equal with God ;" or again, the prophetic ecstasy which exclaimed, " Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that did put all things under Him, that God may be all in all, " with the precise, logical, but hollow-sounding definitions of the Athanasian Creed. And they felt sure of this, too, that He was alive still, and had distinct personal relations with each of them ; and further, that His works and death affected them, not as others do, his- torically and indirectly, but directly and spiritually, and that He had not died for the Jews, or for the disciples, or for truth, or even for humanity, but for each individual soul. 8 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. Now all this may be consistently and plausibly ex- plained by the theory of a myth growing up about an unusual life crowned by a very remarkable death. But to abandon historical certainty, and then attempt to con- struct out of shifting shadows of myths, or the doubtful utterances of an ingenious fanatic, a morality which shall satisfy the conscience of men, or abide their criticism, or create a faith, or found a church, appears to me the most singular delusion ever imagined. The world has seen the result of one such attempt, and has grown very impa- tient of Niebuhrism. Did He believe Himself able to work miracles ? If not, then the very ground of the history is taken from us, and we are launched into chaos. If He did, then, ex kypotkesi, the morality by which men are to live and die rests upon the words of one whom impartial judgment must pronounce to be on the whole below Socrates, who neither claimed supernatural gifts, nor died believing that he should rise in triumph. Or how can we say of such an one that He was perfectly or even unusually good, in the absence of all real evidences as to much of His conduct, such evidences as we have being furnished by devoted, not to say deluded followers ? Who can affirm that He was or was not unduly angry with the Jews, that He acted harshly towards Judas, that His expressions were always modest and truthful ? Kenan's Life gives an absolute negation to the possibility of returning any answer whatever, and leaves us face to face with the true alter- native either myth altogether or history altogether. So much for the way in which the character is presented to us ; let us now try, by a simple analysis of the history itself, to discover whether there is not in it a distinctly The Divine Character of Christ. 9 divine element as clearly separating it from that of ordinary men, as the raising of Lazarus separates the (recorded) actions from ours. I might lay stress upon the difficulty of discovering any special point of view from which to regard it, or of discerning the leading features, or of classifying and labelling the phenomena it presents. But, endeavour- ing to deal with it as with that of ordinary men, I will assume its essence and foundation to consist in three qualities: unselfishness, or His attitude towards Himself; meekness, or His attitude in receiving treatment from men ; humility, or His attitude in dealing with men. ist. Beginning, then, with His unselfishness, there is, I venture to think, an element in it suitable only to God, possible only to God, intelligible only in God, and an object of worship to imperfect beings like ourselves during this our progress to perfection. We distinguish between selfish- ness and self-love. By the former we mean sinful excess in regard to self, and to it we know that He was tempted in both of its two forms. At the beginning of His life, by the desire of power, pleasure, and success in its most subtle manifestations ; at the close, by the fear of pain and death in its most overwhelming force. In all this He has left us something which we can hope to follow ; and yet even here we cannot fail to notice that nearly all that is valuable for mere imitation is omitted. Of the inner shades of thought and feeling, the varying moods, the little details, we learn on the first occasion nothing, and on the second as much as can be told in two or three verses. Our attention is fixed upon the fact of Jesus victorious over sin and death, although, of course, we are bidden to walk in His .steps, taking up our cross and following Him. But granting, io Reconciliation of Religion and Science. as I am quite willing to do, that unselfishness or self- sacrifice, in its ordinary human sense, is a perfectly adequate word to describe His life at these epochs, yet we see, besides this, another element which is not merely the perfect negation of selfishness, but the entire absence of self-love. By this we mean, that rational, reasonable, and righteous care of self, which is practically admitted into all systems of moral philosophy, and certainly into His teaching, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, and do to him as thou wouldest he should do to thee. " Now, is it not obvious that, while Christ laid down this rule for others, He lived Himself by a higher law which included, and, for Him, abolished the former ? We cannot, I think, describe His conduct in these words, or assign it to these motives. He never cared for what men did to Him, or thought of Himself at all. Moral perfection, that is God, made for itself a new law, a law impossible for imperfect beings, though distinctly apprehended by them as the goal to which they tend in the eternal life. I speak with great diffidence, but I am inclined to think that this consideration enables us to answer a charge urged by Positive philosophers against Christian morality, the stress of which has always appeared to me undeniable. They urge that self-love is not so true or deep a basis for morality as the loving humanity better than ourselves. To which it may be answered, that Christ lived Himself by the latter law, but was obliged to recognise a necessity for self-love in beings as yet imperfect, in course of training for a higher, though in noways different, mani- festation of goodness that is, of moral perfection. At any rate, let us now examine whether He was not free essentially from those self-limitations and regards, from which, as a The Divine Character of Christ. 1 1 mere matter of fact, no man has ever, actually or in con- sciousness been able to free himself.* We cannot imagine God as conscious of self, or having self-interest, or needing self-justification. He is, and lives, and is recognised in the works of His creative power. and love. Man, on the other hand, cannot divest himself of self; he must remember that he has a soul to save, a character to justify. The true saving of the soul may lie, as of course it does, in the triumph over all self-interest ; but the consciousness of the soul and of its salvation cannot be got rid of. How, then, stands the case with Christ ? (a.) Self-consciousness. What is with us the obtrusion of self into our works, not at all in a sinful, but simply in a necessary form, corresponds in Him to the consciousness of the Father doing all the works. His meat or drink was to finish that work ; His glory, in having finished it. And it is remarkable that this consciousness of self, this reflection upon our motives and successes, this almost agonising survey of our work and life, is particularly strong in religious reformers. The men who have most moved the world in religion have been those to whom the move- ments of their own souls have been most painfully clear ; for instance, St Paul, Luther, and Milton. Consider the former painfully conscious of his bodily appearance, his reputation, his conversion, his very hand-writing, his labours ; consider the latter brooding over his blindness, his treatment, his failure, the evil days on which he had fallen. And these men powerfully affected the world in * That is, as a being who stands in need. In another sense, as will be seen further on in this book, self-consciousness is necessary to our conception of God as a personal Being. 1 2 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. which they lived, whereas Homer and Shakespeare, of all men the most destitute of self-consciousness, fade away from history, and are spirits, voices, rather than distinct human beings. But in Christ we have an element of self-forgetful- ness, so to speak, combined with a power to move humanity, which renders Him unique in history. But then, to be unique in history, what is it but to be divine ? (&.) Notice, again, the absence of self-interest, which is, indeed, entirely human, and therefore imitable, though rarely imitated, in His refusal to yield to that last tempta- tion of noble souls, and be made a king. But in the great and crowning sacrifice upon the cross there appears another element distinguishable from the former. We have, indeed, the perfectly human spirit, the half-concealed but quite overcome reluctance, the unavailing protest against might, the yielding as to a superior power, which all combine to give their true beauty to human martyrdoms, and shine in the humour of Socrates, the wit of Raleigh, the impul- sive courage of Cranmer, and the hapless submission of Lady Jane Grey. But then, side by side with this, we have words and conduct which are, upon any human ground, neither intelligible nor defensible. All the beauty of mere martyrdom dies out in the words of One who lays down His life of Himself, and will let no man take it from Him. All the rules by which we can judge of ordinary men are set at defiance by One who, after carefully guarding Himself because His hour was not yet come, suddenly refused the most ordinary precautions, courted death, allowed nay worse, commanded the foreknown treachery of Judas to do its work, and died with the certainty of rising again. Such an one may be as far below men as a mistaken fanatic, or The Divine Character of Christ. 1 3 as far above them as a Being conscious of a divine origin and mission. He may be the Christ of Renan or of St John, but hardly of those who acknowledge no other claims upon their allegiance than His character and conduct. (c.) Lastly, self-justification. To take all necessary steps to justify ourselves, and then to leave the issue in the hands of God, is our rule of conduct, not merely for our own sakes, but in the interests of truth and public morality. And it was His, as when He said, " In secret have I said nothing, " and " If I have done well, why smitest thou me ?" But once more a different element asserts itself, indicating a different source of motive and action. Thus the words, " Many good works have I shown you," standing by them- selves, are, though somewhat arrogant, entirely human ; but the addition, "from my Father," gives an absolutely different colour to His defence, and takes every idea of self out of it. He was but an instrument in the hands of God. And again, I remember no instance of the smallest anxiety to know what men thought of Him, that anxiety of the noblest and highest kind, indeed, which breathes in every word of St Paul's, whose whole life and work was bound up with the necessity of vindicating himself. Christ's question is not, "What do men think of me?" but, "Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am ? " A question once more, either the height of human arrogance or the depth of divine humility, conscious not of itself, but of its origin and work from God. 2d. Passing on next to His meekness and humility, by which I have ventured to describe the laws which guided His attitude towards men, we shall, I think, find the same divine element. It may be well to remark here that I have not chosen these arbitrarily, but because they describe the 14 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. two qualities expressly claimed by Himself, " I am meek and lowly in heart," and therefore, so far as I remember, the only two expressly attributed to Him by St Paul, and used as a moral persuasive to goodness, that is, as an ex- ample. It might seem, indeed, almost treasonable to say that there is in these an element which we cannot imitate, for the remembrance of the cross prefigured, foretold, and typified in countless passages of the Old Testament, is exactly that in which the example of Christ speaks most powerfully to our souls just when those souls are at their weakest, and stand most in need of support from without. Yet how can we fail to see that Christ Himself does not use them as an example, but as the ground of an invitation to all weary and heavy-laden souls to come to Him and take His yoke upon them and learn of Him ? The divine consciousness speaks out in the very words that claim human meekness, and asserts for that meekness a more than human power. What a strange mixture of humility and pride would this invitation appear in any ordinary human being ! With what jealousy should we not scan such pretensions ! Let us, however, consider these two qualities separately. There are two aspects of meekness : one, that of receiving favours; the other, injuries the one, for instance, reminding us of Palm Sunday; the other, of Good Friday. Now, belonging to the first of these is the feeling of dependence which is not too proud to ask a favour, or to be thankful for it when received ; and of any one who did not ask we should be inclined to say that he was hardly a human being at all, whereas the absence of gratitude is conceivable in one who knew himself to be something more than man. The Divine Character of Christ. 1 5 Precisely these phenomena present themselves in the life of Christ. There is, indeed, nothing of that continual or re- curring dependence so touching in great souls, and binding them so close to our frail humanity; but there is one request for help, and, so far as I remember, only one, which vindicates His perfect sympathy with our nature. In that hour when most that weak nature asserted its weakness, we find Him entreating the disciples to watch with Him with what result we know, a result that almost, more than any- thing else, attests His awful solitariness. But though He could thus once ask for help, yet He never expressed gratitude for what He received unasked, or even thanks for the obedience paid to His regal requests ; for instance, for the ass's foal, or the upper room at Jerusalem. He defended, indeed, as in the case of the women, those who had done Him a kindness from ungenerous misrepresenta- tions, and He rewarded them after a divine fashion, but their works He accepted as due to Him. But how can a character, in which dependence appears but once and gratitude never, be presented as a perfect model, except upon the supposition of a divine consciousness which ex- plains and harmonises these traits at once ? Once more, in the meekness with which He endured injuries there is nothing of that righteous anger on His own account which is at once essential and unavoidable in man. Anger plays the same part in moral economy that pain plays in physical ; it is the instinctive attitude of self- preservation, of which, having no self-love, He had no need. The idea that He resented the treatment He received, and died praying, not for His enemies, but for the mere ignorant agents of their cruelty, is false to all true coir- 1 6 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. ceptions of His character, to the testimony of the nar- rative, and to the instincts of Christianity. Such a self- sacrifice as His, the free laying down of His life with views that embraced the vast future, the refusal to use any means of escape, is incompatible with anger for personal outrages, and would, indeed, degrade it below our human level. How can the conscious master of more than twelve thousand legions of angels be indignant at the wrongs to which He voluntarily submitted ? But then this absence of anger on one's own account answers precisely to our not the Jewish conception of God. 3d. His humility must be discussed in very few words. By humility is meant freedom from that pride which is the fatal curse of men conscious of great and unusual powers, especially, e.g., Napoleon, in dealing with their fellow- creatures. Now at once occurs the temptation to say that His humility was all the more wonderful because it was consistent with perfect freedom from the sense of sin. But surely to argue thus would be to fall into the error from which I have been painfully endeavouring to keep clear of drawing a distinction in kind between divine and human morality, as though humility in us sprang from a different source, and meant something different from His. Sin does not cause humility, but humiliation, and our humility, so far as we can attain unto it, is the result of Christ's spirit working in us, and not of our conviction of sin. He was conscious of kingship, messiahship, miraculous powers, and that perfect self-command and knowledge and control of others which is the secret of power among men. Yet we see Him without one word of pride, never intoxicated with success, shunning earthly honour, consorting with the The Divine Character of Christ. 1 7 humblest, refusing to lift a finger to stir the crowd which on Palm Sunday were ready for anything He desired, washing the disciples' feet, careless of what kind of death He died that last weakness of poor human pride. In all which there is a humility to which our whole nature responds. But then there is something more. Where in Christ's life is there any trace of that self-respect, the reasonable and righteous form of pride, which is an essential part of our being ? The root of this lies, perhaps, in the necessity which, as a mere fact of history and of consciousness, is incumbent upon every man, of comparing himself with others. This trait once more is especially prominent, nay, even predominant, in St Paul, who in one memorable passage descends to comparison of himself with others in mere personal advantages. True, he does so with an air of proud humility, and with a protest against his own folly ; but that does not take away the fact that the compari- son, after all, was made, and was felt to be necessary. How absolutely and entirely different is the whole aspect and attitude presented in the life of Christ, who never spoke of others, except in one or two difficult passages, in the way of denying the possibility of any comparison at all. One who could say, " It is the Father that doeth the works," could not compare Himself with others. To such an one it is possible to have all power and no pride. And this is our very idea of God, who rejoices in the works of His hands, who cannot be proud of them. At this point I bring my argument to a close, though it might be pursued into endless details. It would be possible to point out in Him a power of self-assertion, culminating in what we should call in any other man the most absolute 1 8 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. sectarianism, of that very kind from which St Paul and Luther on the whole succeeded, and Calvin and Wesley failed in guarding themselves. We should have to inquire into the true significance of a character to which the ex- pression of joy and wonder was never ascribed by His biographers, save once in the first instance, and twice in the second ; in each case at the contemplation of the moral and spiritual effects of belief or of unbelief. We should have to account for, and possibly upon any ordinary view of His character to explain away, His excessive indignation at the Jews, resulting in a condemnation of them that regarded no pleas of excuse, palliation, or even of explanation. The forms, again, in which His knowledge was displayed ; His assertion of personal liberty from all domestic and social and patriotic ties ; His claim to know the truth, and the foundation upon which that claim was based, would require minute investigation. Finally, we should have to consider carefully the exact meaning in Him, and the real power over us, of that trait which most of all speaks to our spirits now, as summing up the Revelation that He made from heaven namely, the profound, unbroken consciousness of the Fatherhood of God. And apart from His personality, we should probably have to conclude with an assertion no stronger than this That having regard to the testimony of a very wonderful Jewish enthusiast, this attitude of Sonship is, on the whole, the highest, the most comfortable, and the most profitable that imperfect creatures like our- selves can assume towards a God, who, nevertheless, it would have to be admitted, has never done a fatherly act towards us since the day when He created, if create He did, the nebulous matter from which all life has proceeded. The Divine Character of Christ. 1 9 And the further we inquired, the more apparent it would become that the character suits and implies the personality, that the personality explains and vindicates the character, and that both together present a foundation ample enough for the moral being of man to repose upon. I must crave the indulgence of my readers for a moment longer, in order to answer two objections, which, if un- answered, would be fatal to my argument. ist. In predicting a crisis in which there shall be two hostile camps, divided by a sharp line from each other, I am not to be supposed to be intolerant of those who cannot make up their minds one way or other ; for the dividing line is not drawn between separate men, but in the soul of each individual man, so that he doubts to which side he belongs, and in a way belongs to both. I do not, indeed, profess to sympathise with, because I do not understand, the doubts of those who do not feel themselves compelled to face the facts of the case, or to decide upon the truth- fulness of the revelation presented to them. Nor is, indeed, doubt quite the right word to apply to them ; let us rather reserve it with all its (remembering Gethsemane) sacred associations for those who have distinctly realised the plain conditions of the question, to whom God seems to be say- ing, "Trust me all, or not at all;" whose minds range from the highest ecstasies of faith, to the sharpest agonies of despair ; whose doubts are as manly as their sufferings are great. Let such be consoled by the reflection that in their doubts the intellectual, and in their sufferings the moral, future of the Christian religion lies concealed. 2d. A protest, hitherto silent, may have arisen in the minds of many, to the effect that the longing to imitate 2O Reconciliation of Religion and Science. Christ perfectly, the conscious determination to be like Him, is sufficient to break through all the cobwebs of such an argument as the preceding. And so it would be, if there were a syllable in that argument which thwarted it, or opposed it, or did it violence in any way. But if we adhere to the definition of worship as the desire for imita- tion, coupled with the consciousness of inability to imitate perfectly in the present life, we leave the amplest scope for the satisfaction of this desire, and provide, what is in these days much wanted, one of the strongest possible arguments for immortality. A little consideration will make this clear. If men become here or hereafter (it makes no matter which, both alike would be heaven) Christlike, then the necessity, and indeed the possibility, of such a life as His in the flesh ceases ; there can be none of the distinctive virtues which suffering produces, when there are none to inflict suffering. Consequently, as has always been the case with simple Christian instincts, the desire for imitation fastens ultimately upon the essential and fundamental qualities of the divine nature, which assumed certain forms when brought into contact with human sin and sorrow, in the life of Christ, and which will abide in those forms wherever there is sin to be healed or sorrow removed ; but which, apart from the sin and sorrow, we dimly foresee, and in half-intelligible language try to describe, as the eternal life of self-sacrifice, in which the self is somehow dropped out of it, that God may be all in all. At any rate, nothing that has been said places the smallest barrier whatever to the boundless desire to imitate the divine character, though with St John I may have ventured to postpone the satisfaction of the desire to the time when He shall appear, and we shall then be like The Divine Character of Christ. 2 1 Him, for we shall then see Him as He is. Words which, however expressive of defective knowledge of His character, and therefore of defective imitation now, do not, neverthe- less, prevent him from adding, with an apparent contradic- tion, which I have tried in this essay to explain, but which is, perhaps, more truly described as the self-contradiction of the soul when gazing upon ultimate truths of God " And every man that hath this hope in him, purifieth himself, even as He is pure." SCIENCE AND IMMORTALITY. T T E who pretends to have anything new to say upon so *- -* old a subject as the immortality of the soul, must expect to arouse certainly opposition, and probably con- tempt. Nevertheless, this at least is certain, that the tendency of science, which has powerfully affected every domain of thought in new and unexpected ways, cannot but place the old doctrine of immortality under new, and, it may be, unexpected lights, abolishing old arguments, and suggesting new ones that have not yet obtained the consideration they deserve. My object in this essay is, to endeavour, by the aid of all-victorious analysis, to throw some little light upon the relations of the belief in immor- tality with scientific thought; and at the outset, I wish distinctly and positively to affirm, that it is not my inten- tion to construct any argument for the belief against science, but merely to explain the conditions under which, as it seems to me, the question must be debated. Those conditions, though in themselves plain and simple, are, I believe, very imperfectly understood, and much bewildering nonsense is talked upon both sides of the question by men who have not clearly realised the nature of evidence, the Science and Immortality. 23 amount of proof required, or the sources from which that proof must be derived. I think it possible to lay down a series of propositions with which, in principle at any rate, most reasonable minds would agree, and which would have the effect of defining the area of debate and the true point of conflict. This may sound presumptuous ; whether it be really so or not, the event alone can prove. Now, the first demand of science is for an accurate defi- nition of the object of discussion, that is, that both religious and scientific thinkers should be quite sure that they are discussing the same thing. Immortality is bound up in the minds of religious people with a vast amount of beauti- ful and endearing associations, which form no part of the hard, dry fact itself. The definition of immortality, viewed scientifically, is, I take it, something of this sort : the exist- ence of a thinking, self-conscious personality after death, that is, after the bodily functions have ceased to operate. This personality may or may not exist for ever ; it may or may not be responsible for the past ; it may or may not be capable of rest, joy, and love ; it may or may not be joined to its old body or to a new body. These, and a hundred similar beliefs with which religion has clothed the mere fact of existence after death, form no essential part, I must again affirm, of the fact itself. And throughout the argu- ment, this, and no other than this, will be the sense in which I use the word immortality ; because it is the only one that I have a right to expect that the scientific mind will accept. It may be well, also, before going further, to make it clear to ourselves in what sense we use the word religion. Men who would be very much ashamed of themselves if 24 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. they were detected using scientific words inaccurately, do, nevertheless, attribute meanings to the word religion which it is difficult to hear with patience. Without, however, entering into verbal discussions, it will be, surely, enough to define religion as a practical belief in and consciousness of God and immortality ; and as the latter is now ab- solutely essential to the idea of religion as a motive moral power, and as, moreover, it includes, or at any rate necessi- tates the belief in the existence of God, we may fairly conclude that, for all practical purposes, and certainly for the purpose of this argument, religion is synonymous with a belief in immortality. And if, for any reason, mankind does at any time cease to believe in its own immortality, then religion will also have ceased to exist as a part of the consciousness of humanity. To clear up, therefore, the relations between immortality and science becomes a matter of the utmost importance. It will be well next to analyse briefly the effect which science has upon the nature of the proofs by which this, like all other facts, must be demonstrated. Let us, for convenience sake, regard the world as a vast jury, before which the various advocates of many truths, and of still more numerous errors, plead the cause of their respective clients. However much a man may wrap himself up in the consciousness of ascertained truth, and affirm that it makes no matter to him what the many believe, yet nature is in the long run too powerful for him, and the instinct of humanity excites him to plead the cause of what he knows to be truth, and to mourn in his heart and be sore vexed if men reject it. Truth is ever generous and hopeful, though at the same time patient and long-suffering ; she longs to Science and Immortality. 25 make converts, but does not deny herself or turn traitress to her convictions if converts refuse to be made. There is a sense, indeed, in which it may be said that truth only becomes actual and vital by becoming subjective through receiving the assent of men. What then must the advocate for the fact of the immortality of the soul expect that science will require of him, when he pleads before the tribunal of the world for that truth which, because it is dear to himself, he wishes to enforce on others ? The alterations in the minds of men which the tendency of modern thought has effected in respect of evidence, may be summed up under two heads. First, the nature of the evidence required is altogether altered, and a great many arguments that would in former days have gone to the jury, are now summarily suppressed. Fact can only be proved by facts, that is, by events, instances, things, which are submitted to experience and observation, and are con- firmed by experiment and reason. And secondly, the minds of the jury are subject to a priori, and, on the whole, perfectly reasonable prepossessions before the trial begins. The existence of changeless law, the regular, natural, and orderly march of life, the numerous cases in which what seemed to be the effect of chance or miracle have been brought within the limits of ascertained causa- tion ; all these things predispose the mind against plead- ings for the supernatural or the divine. Most true of course it is, that there are most powerful prepossessions on the other side as well ; but the difference is, that these are as old as man himself, while the former have only been of later times imported into the debate, and if they have not been originated, have at least received their deft- 26 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. nite aim and vivid impulse from the results of scientific research. Now, the first result which flows from these alterations is the somewhat startling one, that all the arguments for immortality deriv ed from natural religion (so-called) are, in the estimation of science, absolutely futile. To put this point in the strongest form, all the hopes, wishes, and convictions of all the men that ever lived, could not, and cannot convince one single mind that disbelieves in its own immortality. Unless the advocates of religion clearly apprehend this truth, they are, it seems to me, quite dis- abled from entering into the discussion upon conditions which their opponents, by the very law of their opposition, cannot but demand. It is true, indeed, that this temper of mind is confined at present to a comparatively few persons, as in the last century it belonged to the philosophers and to their immediate followers. But then it is as clear as the day that, as science is getting a more and more practical hold upon men's minds by a thousand avenues, and master- ing them by a series of brilliant successes, this temper is rapidly passing from the few into the popular mind ; that it is becoming part of the furniture of the human intellect, and is powerfully influencing the very conditions of human nature. Sooner or later we shall have to face a disposition in the minds of men to accept nothing as fact, but what facts can prove, or the senses bear witness to. In vain will witness after witness be called to prove the inalienable pre- rogative, the intuitional convictions, the universal aspira- tions, the sentimental longings, the moral necessity, all which have existed in the heart of man since man was. Nor will the science of religion help us in the hour of need. Science and Immortality. 2 7 There can be a science of religion exactly as there can be a science of alchemy. All that men have ever thought or believed about the transmutation of metals may be brought together, classified as facts, and form a valuable addition to our knowledge of the history of the human mind, but it would not thereby prove that the transmuta- tion had taken place, or that the desire for it was anything more than man's childlike strivings after that which could only be really revealed by the methods of natural science. So also the science of religion can prove what men have held, and suggest what they ought to hold. It can show that they have believed certain things to be true ; it is utterly powerless to prove that they are true. It can strengthen the principle of faith in those who do not require positive demonstration for their beliefs ; it cannot even cross swords with those, soon to be the majority of thinking men, to whom positive demonstration has become as neces- sary to their minds as food to their bodies. Nay, they will resent rather than welcome the attempt to put a multitude of hopes and myriads of wishes in the place of one solid fact, and will soon confirm themselves in their opinions, by the obvious argument that these hopes and wishes are peculiar to the childhood of the race, and form only one out of many proofs, that man is liable to perpetual self-deception until he confronts fact and law. Not, indeed, that they will indulge in the equally unscientific statement that there is no such thing as immortality. The attitude of mind which they will assume will be that of knowing nothing, and of having no reasonable hope of ever dis- covering anything about man's future destiny. And while they will think it good that man, or at any rate that some 28 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. men, should allow themselves to hope for life after death, yet they will steadily oppose any assertion that these hopes ought to guide men's conduct, influence their motives, or form their character. Now if this be true, it is difficult to overrate the impor- tance of thoroughly and distinctly realising it. That the evidence for the truths of natural religion is overwhelming, is one of the statements that are accepted as truisms, at the very moment that science is slowly leavening the human intellect with the conviction that all such evidence is scientifically worthless. Nevertheless, the opposite idea has taken firm hold of the religious mind, and forms the basis of many an eloquent refutation of the " presumptuous assurance " and " illogical obstinacy " of modern thought. Men must have smiled to hear themselves alternately refuted and rebuked by controversialists who did not understand the tone of mind against which they were arguing, or who assumed as true the very things which their opponents resolved to know nothing about, either in the way of belief or rejection. It is very certain, however, that this error will not yield to the mere statement that it is an error, and therefore I will go on to examine a little more minutely the various arguments by which men seek to prove the doctrine of immortality. These are mainly fourfold : (i.) That it is an original intuition, and arising from this (2.) That it is an universal belief. (3.) That it follows necessarily from the existence of God. (4.) That it is essential as a motive for human morality. Science and Immortality. 2 9 (i.) I take the statement of this argument from the words of one, than whom no man has a better right to be heard on such a subject. Professor Max M tiller, in his preface to the first volume of his " Chips from a German Workshop," writes as follows : " An intuition of God, a sense of human weakness and dependence, a belief in a divine government of the world, a distinction between good and evil, and a hope of a better life, these are the radical elements of all religions. . . . Unless they had formed part of the original dowry of the human soul, religion itself would have remained an impossibility/' Now I am not quite sure that I understand in what sense the writer means to assert that these intuitions, which, for practical purposes, may be limited to three God, sin, and immortality, are part of the original dowry of the human soul. If it is meant that there was a special creation of the human soul, furnished from the beginning with these three intuitions, then science will resolutely refuse to admit the fact. There can be no mistake about the position held by the bulk of scientific men, and little doubt, I should think, as to its reasonableness. If there is anything that is in ultimate analysis incomprehensible, or any fact that cannot be accounted for by natural causes, then the possibility of special creation and original intuitions must be candidly allowed, but not otherwise. There is just a chance, for instance, that the difference between the brains of the lowest man and the highest animal, may ultimately be re- garded as a fact inexplicable upon any theory of evolution, more, however, from a lack of evidence than from any other cause. Be this as it may, the possibility of special creation finds a distinct foothold in the acknowledged fact that 3O Reconciliation of Religion and Science. the connection between thought and the brain of animals as well as of man, is an ultimate incomprehensibility, a mystery which the law of man's intelligence prevents his ever even attempting or hoping to understand. The famous saying, " Cogito y ergo sum!' the foundation of all modern meta- physics, may come to be a formula under which religion, philosophy, and science may all take shelter, and approach each other without ever actually meeting. But the three intuitions of God, sin, and immortality, can all be accounted for by the growth of human experience, as every one knows who has at all studied the subject. At some period of the world's history, science will answer, an ape-like creature first recognised that it or he had offended against the good of some other creature, and so became conscious of sin, or was created as a moral being. Thus Mr Darwin has affirmed, but (speaking from memory) I do not think he has called very special atten- tion to that still greater epoch (or was it the same ?) in man's history, when this ape-like creature, seeing one of its own species lying dead, recognised as a fact, " I shall die." This is what we may term the creation of man as an im- mortal being ; for in the very conflict of the two facts one, the reflecting being, the self-conscious I ; the other, death, the seeming destroyer lies embedded all man's future spiritual cravings for eternity. And the idea of God would come in the order of nature, before either of these, to the creature which first reflected upon the source of its own existence, and recognised a " tendency in things which it could not understand." This is, in brief, the scientific account of man's creation, and of the growth of the ideas of natural religion within his mind ; and we may remark in Science and Immortality. 3 1 passing that it must be a singularly uncandid and prejudiced mind which does not recognise that the book of Genesis, which, upon any theory, contains man's earliest thoughts about himself, expresses in allegorical fashion, exactly the same views. The same views are also apparently expressed by Pro- fessor Max Miiller, in a very beautiful passage in the article on Semitic Monotheism, in the same volume : "The primitive intuition of God and the ineradicable feeling of dependence upon God could only have been the result of a primitive revelation in the truest sense of that word. Man> who owed his existence to God, and whose being centred and rested in God, saw and felt God as the only source of his own and all other existence. By the very act of the creation God had revealed Himself. Here He was, manifested in His works in all His majesty and power before the face of those to whom He had given eyes to see and ears to hear, and into whose nostrils He had breathed the breath of life, even the Spirit of God." The first impression made by this passage may be, that, In speaking of a " revelation in the truest sense," it affords an instance of that hateful habit of using religious words in a non-natural sense. But a little deeper consideration will show that no possible definition of a revelation, accom- panied and attested by miracles, can exclude the revelation made by nature to the first man who thought. In fact, we have here a description of creation, which science, with possibly a little suspiciousness at some of the phrases, may accept, while, at the same time, natural religion is carried to its utmost and highest limits ; and along with this a foundation is laid for a truer theory of the miraculous. But while gladly admitting all this, the fact remains that these intuitions, following upon a revelation in which nature herself was the miracle, are still plainly only the expressions 32 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. of man's inward experiences, and that, however old and venerable and exalted, they are still only hopes, wishes, and aspirations, which may or may not be true, but which are incapable of proving the actual facts towards which they soar. It is open, therefore, to any man accustomed to look for positive demonstration, to dismiss them as dreams of the infancy of man, or to relegate them into the prison- house of the incomprehensibilities, or to content himself with a purely natural theory of human life, which rejects and dislikes the theological. (2.) But when we come to inquire how far these primary intuitions have been universal, and whether they can be fairly called ineradicable, we are met by some very startling facts. The dictum, o iraai So/eel rovro elvdt, a[Jiev, is so reasonable in itself, that no serious attempt would be made to question a belief that even approached to being universal, even if it could not be shown to be part of the original furniture of the mind. But the real difficulty lies in finding (apart from morals) any beliefs of which this universality can be predicated, and assuredly the immortality of the soul is not one of them. The mind of man at its lowest seems incapable of grasping the idea ; and the mind of man at its highest has striven to emancipate itself from it altogether. The evidence for this statement lies within the reach of all, but I will just adduce three names, whose very juxtaposition, by the sense of incongruous oddity stirred up, may make their joint testimony the more important. I mean Moses, Buddha, and Julius Caesar, all of whom, though widely sepa- rated in time, race, and character, representing absolutely different types of human nature, approaching the subject from widely different points of view, do, nevertheless, agree Science and Immortality. 33 in this, that the consciousness of immortality formed no part of the furniture of their minds. Moses lived one of the most exalted lives, whether re- garded from the religious or political side, that has ever been lived on earth, and yet, as is well-known, there is not a shadow of a trace to prove that he was moved by the hope of a reward after death, or that the idea of existence after death was ever consciously presented to his mind. He may be, on the whole, claimed by modern science (the miraculous element being by it excluded) as an example of those who perform the greatest practical duties, and are content to stand before the mystery of the Unknowable without inquiry and without alarm, so far as the doctrine of man's immortality is concerned. Here is another of those strange links that unite the earliest thinker and legislator with so much of the spirit of modern thought and law. Buddha, on the contrary (or his disciples, if it be true that his original teaching is lost to us), cannot be quoted as one who did not realise the possibility of life after death, nor is any scheme of philosophy that is practically Pan- theistic inconsistent with immortality, if we limit the word to the bare idea of existing somehow after death. But I rather quote him as one of those who show that the very consciousness of undying personal life, the existence of a self-reflecting ego, which gives all its shape and force to the desire for life after death, may come to be regarded as a positive evil, and painless extinction be maintained as the ultimate hope and destiny of man. And the case of Julius Caesar is, in some respects, stronger still. He is one of the world's crowning intellects, and he lived at a time when men such as he were the heirs of all the ages, the possessors 34 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. of the treasures of thought, in which, for generations past, the greatest men had elaborated doctrines concerning religion, duty, and life. And he represents the views of those whom the truest voice of science now repudiates as running into unscientific extremes. With him non-existence after death was a matter of practical belief. It coloured his opinions upon politics, as really as Cromwell's religion affected his. He spoke against the infliction of the penalty of death upon the conspirators in Catiline's case, be- cause death was a refuge from sorrows, because it solved all mortal miseries, and left place for neither care nor joy. And Cato expressly applauded his sentiments, though with a touch of reaction from popular theology, which sounds strangely modern. To this then all the original intuitions of the human mind, all the glowing aspirations enshrined in Greek poetry, legend, and art, all the natural theology contained in the words of Socrates and Plato, had come at last. Will any reasonable man affirm that an age, which breathes the very air of materialism, and whose children suck in the notions of changeless law with their mother's milk, can arrive at anything better if it has no facts upon which to rely, as proofs that its hopes are not unfounded ? And how can that be called a truth of human nature, or be allowed to exercise a real influence upon men's minds, which is capable of being either entirely suppressed, or earnestly striven against, or contemptuously rejected ? (3.) The remaining two arguments need not detain us long ; indeed, I should not have mentioned them were it not that very eminent divines have based the belief in immortality upon the existence of God or the necessities of man. Let it once be granted that we are the creatures of Science and Immortality. 35 a personal, loving, and sustaining God, concerning whom it is possible to form adequate conceptions, and then doubts as to our immortality would be vain indeed. But the rejoinder from the scientific view is plain enough. This, it would be said, is a mere obscurum per obscurius* The belief in God is simply the working of the human mind, striving to account for the beginning of its own existence, exactly as the belief in immortality is the result of the attempt to think about the end thereof. If the definition of God be a stream or tendency of things that we cannot otherwise account for, then it will not help us to a belief in immortality. It is surprising indeed to see how the plain conditions of the case are evaded by enthusiastic controversialists ; and I am almost ashamed of being obliged to make statements that have an inevitable air of being the baldest truisms. (4.) The idea that immortality is essential to the moral development of man, and that therefore it is demonstrably true, seems to receive some little countenance from Pro- fessor Max Miiller in the close of his article on Buddhism, in which he thinks it improbable that " The reformer of India, the teacher of so perfect a code of morality, . . . should have thrown away one of the most powerful weapons in the hands of every religious teacher, the belief in a future life, and should not have seen that, if life was sooner or later to end in nothing, it was hardly worth the trouble which he took himself, or the sacrifices which he imposed upon his disciples." The true bearing, in all its immense importance, of human morality upon the belief in immortality, will have to be considered hereafter ; but when used as a demonstration, it is at once seen to belong to a class of arguments, which 36 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. science resolutely rejects. The moral development of man depends upon a right recognition of ascertainable facts, never upon beliefs which may or may not be fictitious. A much more fatal answer, however, is found in a simple appeal to history, from which it will be found that, in Mr Froude's words, no doctrine whatever, even of immortality, has a mere " mechanical effect " upon men's hearts and con- sciences, and that noble lives may be lived, and exalted characters formed, by those who are brave enough to dis- regard it. Nay, what is worse, immortality may be a powerful weapon for evil as for good, if it chime in with a perverted nature. The Pharaoh before whom Moses stood believed it, and we know with what results. Only that, once more will science retort, which can be proved to be true upon sufficient evidence, can be positively known to be useful. To sum up, then, what has been said, we have seen that, however strong may be the wishes of man for immortality, however ennobling to his nature and true to his instincts the belief in it may appear to be, there is nothing in natural religion to answer the demands of modern thought for actual proof, and nothing therefore to impugn the wisdom or refute the morality of that class of persons, representing, as they do, a growing tendency in the human mind, who take refuge in a suspense of thought and judgment upon matters which they declare are too high for them. Occa- sionally we may suspect that the garb of human weakness does but conceal the workings of human pride, never per- haps so subtle and so sweet as when human nature meekly resolves to be contented with its own imperfections, and to bow down before its own frailty ; but denunciations of Science and Immortality. . 3 7 moral turpitude only harden the hearts of men who ask for the bread of evidence, and receive stones in the shape of insults. We turn next to consider the effects of modern thought upon the evidence for immortality derived from Revelation. And here the difficulty of obtaining assent to what seem to me obvious truths will be transferred from the advocates of religion to those of science. Nevertheless, I maintain an invincible conviction that it is possible to state the terms of debate in propositions which commend themselves to candid minds, and which do not, as I have said, pretend to solve the controversy, but merely to define its con- ditions. Now the first proposition is : That the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, if assumed to be true, does present actual scientific evidence for immortality. An illustration will make my meaning clear. Whether or not life can be evolved from non-living matter is a subject of debate ; but it is admitted on all hands, that if a single living creature can be produced under conditions that exclude the pre- sence of living germs, then the controversy is settled, and therefore Dr Bastian sets himself to work with the neces- sary apparatus to prove his case. So, in the same way, if any man known to be dead and buried did rise again (as for the moment is assumed to be the case), and did think and act and speak in his own proper personality, then immortality (in the scientific sense of the word) is thereby proved. Accordingly, those who wish to prove their case, betake themselves to history for the required evidence, which they may or may not find, but which, such as it is, must be allowed to go to the jury. Science may refuse to 38 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. listen to arguments for facts derived from men's hopes and beliefs; it ceases to be science if it refuses to listen to arguments which profess to rely upon facts also. Were there to happen now an event purporting to resemble the Resurrection, it would be necessary to examine the evidence exactly as men are commissioned to investigate any unusual occurrence, say, for instance, the supposed discovery of fertile land at the North Pole. All this is plain enough, and leads to no very important conclusions, but it is, nevertheless, necessary that it should be stated clearly, and distinctly apprehended. Two other propositions may also be laid down as to the nature of the evidence for the Resurrection, both of them once more sufficiently obvious ; but still not without their value in leading to a fair and reasonable estimation of the exact state of the case, and tending also, as we shall see presently, in one direction. It may be taken for granted, in the first place, that nothing can be alleged against the moral character of the witnesses, or against the morality which accompanied, and was founded upon the preaching of the Resurrection. Mistaken they may have been, but not dishonest; enthusiasts, but not impostors. Further- more, the deeper insight into character, which is one of the results of the modern critical spirit, enables us to see that they numbered among their ranks men of singular gifts, both moral and intellectual, who combined in a wonderful degree the faculty of receiving what was, or what they thought to be, a miraculous revelation, and the power of setting it forth in a sober and measured manner. All this is candidly admitted by the best representatives of modern thought. Science and Immortality. 39 Again, it may safely be asserted that, judged by the critical standards of historical science, the evidence is abundantly sufficient to prove any event not claiming to be miraculous. Let us suppose such an event as an ex- traordinary escape from prison related in the same way, though I admit that it requires a considerable intellectual tour de force to eliminate, even in imagination, the super- natural from the narrative. It is not going too far, to say that no real question as to its truth would in that case ever be raised at the bar of history, even though a powerful party were interested in maintaining the contrary. A strictly scientific investigation, for instance, has brought out in our own days the absolute accuracy, and consequent evidential value, of the account of St Paul's voyage to Malta. On the whole, then, we may conclude that the testimony is really evidence in the case, that it proceeds from honest and capable men, and that no one, apart from the existence of the supernatural element, would care to deny its truthfulness, except upon grounds that would turn all history into a mass of fables and confusion. There remains, then, the old argument, that it is more easy to believe the witnesses to be mistaken than the fact itself to be true, and that we cannot believe a miracle unless it be more miraculous to disbelieve it. To this argument I avow my deliberate conviction, after the best thought I can give the subject, that no answer can be given regarded from a merely intellectual point of view, and subject to the conditions which modern thought not only prescribes but is strong enough to enforce. It goes by the name of Hume, because he was the first to formulate it; but it is not so much an argument as a simple state 4O Reconciliation of Religion and Science. ment of common experience. All men who, from the days of St Thomas, have disbelieved in miracles have done so practically upon this ground. And to the "doubting" Apostle may be safely attributed the first use of the now famous formula, " It is much more likely that you, my friends, should be mistaken than that He should have risen." Now, to such a state of mind, what answer short of another miracle could be given then, or can be given now ? True, you may point out the moral defects in the mind of Thomas which led him to disbelieve, but these are immediately counterbalanced by a reference to the intel- lectual defects of Mary Magdalene, which prompted her to accept, the miracle. There is no real room for weighing the evidence on both sides, and pronouncing for that which has the greatest probability, when your opponent, by a simple assertion, reduces all the evidence on one side to zero. Once more let me ask Christian apologists to realise this, and having realised it, no matter at what cost to the fears and prejudices of theology, let us then proceed the more calmly to examine what it precisely means, and to what conclusions it leads us. We observe, first, that this argument is derived not from the first of the two ways in which, as we saw, science influences belief, namely, by altering the nature of the evidence required, but from the second, namely, by predis- posing the minds of men against belief upon any attainable evidence whatever. We have seen that the evidence is that of honest men, that it is scientifically to the point, and sufficient to prove ordinary historical events. More than this cannot be demanded in the case of events which do not come under law or personal observation. But the Science and Immortality. 4 1 minds of men are so predisposed by their experience of unchanging order to reject the miraculous, that, first, they demand more and more clear evidence than in other cases, and, secondly, they have recourse at once to the many considerations which weaken the force of evidence for things supernatural, and account for men's mistakes with- out impugning their veracity. Any one who reads Hume's essay will be struck at once with the, so to speak, sub- jectivity of the argument. Upon this very point he says, " When any one tells me he saw a dead man restored to life, I immediately consider within myself" &c., &c. We ask then, at once, " To whom is it more likely that evidence of a miracle should be false, than that the miracle should be true ? " and the answer must of course be, " Those who, rightly or wrongly, are predisposed in that direction by their experience of a changeless law, growing ever wider and more comprehensive." Nor is Paley's answer, which assumes the existence of God, at all available as against Hume, who, in his next section, puts into the mouth of an imaginary Epicurus all the arguments against such a belief. But it is a most just and reasonable remark that this pre- disposition does not exist in the case of those who again rightly or wrongly are wishing to know God and hoping to live after death. It is at this point that natural and revealed religion, weak when divided, becomes strong by combination. The Resurrection would certainly never be believed, if it did not fall like a spark upon a mass of wishes and aspirations, which are immediately kindled into life. Granted a man (and this is no supposition, but a fact), whose whole nature craves, not to die, and whose mind is occupied by the standing miracle of its own 42 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. immortality, and then the Resurrection, so far from being improbable, will be the very thing which gives life to his hopes. The more he sees that natural religion cannot give him facts, as proofs, the more he will welcome Revelation which does, just because it will satisfy the rational desire which science is creating in the human mind. And just as there is no answer to Hume's argument for one predisposed as Hume was, so is there none to one predisposed as this supposed (but very actual) man is. The one is as incapable of disbelief as the other of assent. Hume and Paley do not really grapple with each other, but move in parallel lines that never meet. As Hume himself said of Berkeley, "His arguments admit of no answer and produce no conviction," so might each of the two say of the other. On the one hand we have all the results of human experience, a severe standard of intellectual virtue, a morality which confines it- self to its duties towards humanity, and the power of being able not to think about ultimate incomprehensibilities. On the other hand, we have intense longings after the infinite, which science, admitting, as it does, the existence of the Unknowable, cannot possibly deny to be legitimate in those who feel them sincerely ; also a body of evidence, sufficient to prove ordinary events, for a fact, that gives certainty and power to all these longings ; a morality, which has reference to a Supreme Judge, and an absolute incapacity for life and duty, until some sort of conclusion has been arrived at concerning the mysteries of our being and destiny. Both of these represent tendencies of human nature with which the world could at this stage very badly dispense ; both may have their use and their justification ; Science and Immortality. 43 either may be true, but both cannot, for the Resurrection either did or did not happen. From this account of things some very important con- siderations follow, a few of which I will endeavour to sum up in three heads. The scientific value of Revelation as a necessity, if there is to be any vital and practical religion at all, will, I hope, have been sufficiently indicated already, (i.) The lines of a long, and, perhaps, never-ending con- flict between the spirit of Religion and what, for want of a better word, I will call the spirit of Rationalism, are here defined. Neither of the two being able by mere argument to convince the other, they must rely upon gradually leavening the minds of men with prepossessions in the direction which each respectively favours. The time may come when Rationalism will have so far prevailed that a belief in the miraculous will have disappeared ; the time may also come when the Christian Revelation, historically accepted, will everywhere be adopted as God's account to man of ultimate incomprehensibilities. Surely, no man who has ever fairly examined his own consciousness can deny that elements, leading to either of these two con- clusions exist within his own mind. He must be a very hardened believer to whom the doubt, " Is the miraculous really possible ? " never suggested itself. And he must, in turn, be a very unscientific Rationalist who has never caught himself wondering whether, after all, the Resurrection did not take place. Nor, so far as we may at this epoch dis- cern the probable direction of the contest, is it possible to estimate very accurately the influence which science will exercise upon it. On the one hand, it will certainly bring within the mental grasp of common men that view of law 44 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. and causation, which, in Hume's time, was confined to philosophers and their followers, and was attained rather by intellectual conceptions, than by such common ex- periences of every-day life and thought as we have at present. On the other hand, it will purge religion of its more monstrous dogmas, and further, by calling attention to the necessity of proving fact by fact, and again, by clear- ing up the laws of evidence, will tend to deepen in the minds of religious people the value and meaning of Revela- tion ; while, at the same time, by its frank admission of hopeless ignorance, it will concede to faith a place in the realm of fact. Every man will have his own views as to the issue of the conflict : for the present it is sufficient for him, if he can be fully satisfied in his own mind. (2.) The predisposition in men's minds in favour, whether of Religion or Rationalism, will be created and sustained solely by moral means. This is the conclusion toward which I have been steadily working from the beginning of this Essay to the end of it. The intellect of both Christian and Rationalist will have its part to play; but that part will consist in presenting, teaching, and enforcing each its own morality upon the minds of men. I need not say that I use the word morality, as expressing in the widest sense all that is proper for and worthy of humanity, and not merely in the narrower sense of individual good- ness. Rationalism will approach mankind rather upon the side of the virtues of the intellect. It will uphold the need of caution in our assent, the duty of absolute conviction, the self-sufficiency of man, the beauty of law, the glory of working for posterity, and the true humility of being content to be ignorant where knowledge is impossible. Science and Immortality. 45 Religion will appeal to man's hopes and wishes recorded in nature and in history, to his yearnings for affection, to his sense of sin, to his passion for life and duty, which death cuts short. And that one of the two which is truest to humanity, which lays down the best code of duty, and creates the strongest capacity for accomplishing it, will, in the long run, prevail ; a conclusion which science, so far as it believes in man, and religion, so far as it believes in God, must adopt. Here, once more, it is well nigh impossible to discern the immediate direction of the conflict, whatever may be our views as to its ultimate decision. Science is almost creating a new class of virtues ; it is laying its finger with unerring accuracy upon the faults of the old morality ; it is calling into existence a passion for intellectual truth. But then religion has always given the strongest proofs of her vitality by her power of assimilating (however slowly) new truths, and of rejecting (alas ! how tardily) old falsehoods at the demands of reason and discovery. A religious man can always say that Christians, and not Christianity, are respon- sible for what goes amiss. It is because religious practice never has been, and is at this moment almost less than ever, up to the standard of what religious theory exacts, that we may have confidence in gradual improvement and advance, until that standard, towards the formation of which science will have largely contributed, be attained. (3.) Closely connected with the above, follows the pro- position that all attempts on the part of religion to confute the "sceptic " by purely intellectual methods are worse than useless. There is no intellectual short cut to the Christian faith ; it must be built up in the minds of men by setting forth a morality that satisfies their nature, consecrates 46 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. humanity, and establishes society. It is not because men love the truth, but because they hate their enemies, that in things religious they desire to have what they call an over- whelming preponderance of argument on their side of the question, the possession of which enables them to treat their opponents as knaves or fools or both. Religion may have been the first to set this pernicious example, but, judging from the tone of much modern writing, Rationalism has somewhat bettered her instructions. No doubt it is a tempting thing to mount a big pulpit, and then and there, with much intellectual pomp, to slay the absent infidel absent no less from the preacher's argument than from his audience. Delightful it may be, but all the more dangerous, because it plunges men at once into that error, so hateful to modern thought, of affirming that intellectual mistakes are moral delinquencies. No one, least of all science, denies that men are responsible for the consequences of their belief, provided these consequences are limited to such as are capable of being recognised and foreseen, and are not extended to comprehend endless perdition in a future state an idea which is supposed, rightly or wrongly, to lurk beneath the preacher's logical utterances, and which religion has done next to nothing to disavow. And so we come to this conclusion : to build up by precept and example a sound and sufficient morality ; to share in all the hopes and aspirations of humanity ; to be foremost in practical reforms ; to find what the instincts of mankind blindly search for by reference to the character of God finally revealed in Christ, and to the hope of immortality which His Resurrection brought to light ; to endeavour to clear religion from the reproach of credulity, narrowness, Science and Immortality. 47 timidity, and bitter sectarian zeal ; these are, as our Master Himself assured us, the only means of engendering in the hearts of men that moral quality which we call Faith : for " HE THAT IS OF THE TRUTH HEARETH MY VOICE." MORALITY AND IMMORTALITY. r | "HE general result arrived at in the previous Essay -* may be summed up as follows : 1. The desires and opinions of men upon the subject of their ultimate destiny do not amount to such an absolute demonstration of the truth of immortality as science demands, whereas the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, assumed to be tnie, is an actual instance of the fact requiring to be proved, i.e., that men can live after death. 2. There is enough evidence to satisfy a reasonable man of the truth of the history of the Resurrection, provided there was nothing miraculous in that history. 3. Minds that are already deeply concerned with the miracle of their own immortality will find no difficulty in accepting the narrative, even though it includes a mir- aculous element, whereas minds that are not so concerned will find no difficulty in rejecting it. 4. Hence it follows that the controversy will ultimately turn upon the question, whether the doctrine of immortality can or cannot be recommended to the minds of men as necessary to, and necessitated by, human morality in its widest sense. If it can, then men will continue to believe the Resurrection, the evidence of which is, apart from the Morality and Immortality. 49 miraculous, sufficient, and reasonable ; if it cannot, then they will cease to believe that which has no moral value for them. It now becomes my duty to abandon the neutral position I have hitherto endeavoured to maintain, and to assume that of an advocate for Christianity. But it is necessary to observe that this does not imply either that I should advocate Christianity as it now is, or find fault with science for holding aloof from it. On the contrary, the best hope for religion lies in the fact of science continuing to utter a clear and outspoken protest against the errors that are bringing discredit upon her name, and sensibly, though gradually, weakening her influence for good. Assuredly, if Christianity is to prevail by being morally attractive to all that is best in humanity, then there is nothing in the modern forms it has assumed to attract minds trained in the severe love of truth, and in the search for facts whereon truth may repose. Christian apologists are too apt to speak as though the ideal Christianity which they represent had any real hold upon the minds of the mass of men, and to forget that practically it means ultramontanism and sec- tarianism, the infallibility of the Pope, balanced by the infallibility of the Bible. Its moral value in special depart- ments of life is not denied, but it is contended that these gigantic sins against humanity and truth do at this present moment, on the whole, outweigh its claims in other respects. This is not, however, a very practical question, nor one into which I greatly care to enter ; it is enough to point out that unless (what I fully expect) science reforms religion in the same way as did the revival of classical learning, religion will cease to be the custodian of man's deepest thoughts upon morality and eternity. 5O Reconciliation of Religion and Science. My business is simply to call attention to facts, which seem to show that a belief in immortality is essential to the highest powers, as well as to the most general needs of human nature. This inquiry belongs to the science of religion, and is strictly scientific in its methods and results. Let me once more state what the proofs thus obtained really amount to. It is quite possible to examine the facts of human nature and of history, and from them to discover whether or not they lead, and will continue to lead, to a desire for immortality ; but such a desire amounts to no scientific proof of the fact itself. That the desire for immortality is natural to man, and in accordance with his instincts and circumstances, is what I believe, and am about to endeavour to show. But then, why should I have to do it at all ? Surely it might be thought that so obvious a duty would be discharged more than sufficiently in all the sermons and writings produced by a fertile and laborious theology. Yet, so far as my own reading of modern religious books goes, I have met with no systematic attempt in this direction, indeed, with nothing but an occasional remark occurring amidst a crowd of other and irrelevant topics. Christian literature, taking its tone from Dr Newman, may be said, on the whole, to attempt to answer these questions by an evasion of the law of evidence. This is, indeed, a just and fitting punishment. If men choose to return to scholastic subtleties and verbal definitions, if the minds and pens of Catholics and Evangelicals alike are occupied with questions about the methods and meaning of Regeneration, Justification, The Real Presence, Church Government, and Ritual Observance, then they must be content to leave the weightier matters of humanity to those Morality and Immortality. 5 1 who stand outside of Christianity altogether, and who watch them with malicious amusement paying tithe of mint and cummin, enlarging the borders of their garments, and compassing sea and land (not to say the law courts) that they may make one proselyte with what result let the tone and temper of the religious press declare. We are now to consider some plain facts of man's nature as bearing upon his wish for immortality. And first, I avail myself of the old truth that men must seek their own happiness, only substituting for that much-abused word one that Christianity has sanctioned and science will accept, the joy of existence. Of what elements is this composed ? What are the things by which men live, and to which they have, as it were, a personal and inalienable right ? What, when we examine the wonders of our own being, can we claim of God, who has made us what we are, and therefore made us to wish for that which we find our- selves incapable of not wishing for ? I have worded this last sentence so as to include both the Christian and scientific conception of God, but in future I shall speak of the facts of life and nature under the terms which religion has given them. Now the answer to these questions may be summed up under these three words, power, reputation, and rest, to which, though in a somewhat different category, may be added love. I do not put these forward as a scientific classification, though it is obvious that they may be taken to cover the joy of existence regarded as present, past, and future. But I state them as simple facts of human nature, which history and consciousness assure us to be true, and I propose to take them in order, and see what they teach us concerning man's desires for immortality. 52 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. I might, of course, trace the sense of power to man's consciousness of being a free agent, that is, a creative and originating being, but as this would lead us straight to thorny metaphysical discussions, I prefer to rest it upon the simplest fact of observation and experience. Every human soul is different from every other, and the further we ascend in the scale of civilisation, grows more widely different. Life, when regarded from the stand-point of the doctrine of evolution, may be compared to a cluster of mountains crowded together at their base, but whose peaks shine far apart in solitary splendour. Every man has a character of his own, a part of his own to play, duties which none but he can discharge, persons dependent on him for love and help. God (it would be equally true if we said law or nature) cannot consistently with Himself create two moral beings exactly alike, to each is given a special spark of the divine life ; when we realise this, then the whole astonishing conception of man's essential divinity rushes into the mind. And therefore every true soul cannot but demand the power to live out its life, and to fill its place in the universe of God. To learn more of that knowledge which is open to all, to perform better those duties which are common to all and yet special to each, to become more useful in our place and calling, this is power, and right, and life. But this consciousness of individuality and of progress pleads for a life to come ; it is the combination of the two that makes the desire irresistible. Men resent the idea of final death because they have learnt to feel that humanity progresses by the progress of individuals, and death inter- feres just when the moral being is developing towards perfection. It is of course tempting to adduce the case of Morality and Immortality. 53 those who die in the prime of strength and usefulness as filling mankind with an inextinguishable desire for com- pletion in a future state ; but in truth the argument is far stronger if we take, not the exceptional, but the typical case, that of men who depart in the fulness of age. On the one hand, there is a sense of departed power, a con- sciousness of thwarted labour, a faintly sad smile as of those to whom work has become impossible; on the. other, there is a tender sagacity that has ceased to strive here, and is preparing for work hereafter, a special and anxious care for those around as though they could never cease to be objects of love and care : in a word, the decay of autumn, when the flower is fading and the seed within is ripening. Such is the old age of men who have worked and hoped, and such is the life which, if any one has ever possessed it, or rather been possessed by it, he will not lightly part with it, or cease to wish that it may be con- tinued in a world to come. The onus probandi is as it were changed, and he insists on desiring immortality unless it can be shown that death is final. His desire may be destroyed by contradictory evidence, or rather it may be shown to rest upon no evidence at all, for to adduce evidence that we are not immortal is a contradiction in terms, and requires immortality to do it. But assuredly it will welcome any fact which throws light upon its own yearnings, and gives force and power to its own convictions; and thus it fastens upon such an event as the Resurrection, supported as it is by reasonable evidence, with a tenacity that will defy the assaults of persons otherwise minded and in other ways supported. Nor can it be blamed upon moral grounds for so doing ; much less can it be shown to 54 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. be contrary to scientific conceptions. Natural development is carried on by means of minute physical variations in each successive generation, but when we ascend to man, the moral variations in descendants are so great and so complex that they do not form, and cannot be classed under a new species, but become separate individuals, which, just because they are separate, lay claim to an eternity, in which each may live out its life to the fullest, discharge its duties, and fulfil its destiny. Next let us observe how the desire for reputation and rest, perfectly natural, legitimate, and praiseworthy, kindles within the soul a hope of immortality. The connection between these two and immortality is indeed so obvious that it will be enough merely to observe how true to the facts of human life the desire for reputation and for rest is, and then the result follows at once : the same remark may indeed be made as to any of the primary elements in man's moral nature which we shall adduce, for all alike, the moment they are mentioned, seem to breathe the air and suggest the idea of immortality. The desire for fame is then the craving to be fairly judged and recognised accord- ing to the way in which we have used the "power" of which I have been speaking. It is an universal instinct of mankind, from which no civilised man has ever been exempt, and exemption from which would be treated as utterly immoral. No one who has tried to do his duty does not wish to be kindly remembered after death : man has a right to a just judgment, which in turn is not a thing to be escaped from, as a false theology teaches, but to be welcomed as an inestimable privilege from the Creator. For no one can really be content to be subject to the Morality and Immortality. 55 unaided judgment, the rough, partial, hap-hazard decisions of men, even of those dearest to us. The praise of men, like their gratitude, oftener leaves us mourning. One of the most certain results of modern thought is that the so- called verdict of history is a mere pretence for hiding man's incapacity to decide upon the actual character of historical personages, and that history will more and more occupy herself with the delineation of great movements and the part that each man played in them. And what is true on a large scale is true on a small one : no man is ever known for what he really is. A poor consolation indeed for those who have endured neglect, obloquy, and, what is far worse than either, the being compelled by the inequalities of the world to live a life far below their power and their deserv- ings. Real reputation is the reflection of the glory of God upon the lives of men, but when men feel that they are not really known for what they are, nor condemned for their real faults, nor honoured for their real merits, then with desperate despair they make their appeal to another life, and claim to stand before the eternal judgment-seat as men who are wrestling. with the sharpest agony of death. On such a matter we may perhaps be willing to listen to the authority of one of the chief of those who have needed eternity to repair the mistakes of time : " Fame is no plant that grows on mortal soil, Nor in the glistening foil Set off to the world, nor in broad rumour lies ; But lives and spreads aloft by those pure eyes And perfect witness of all-judging Jove ; As he pronounces lastly on each deed, Of so much fame in Heaven expect thy meed." . Next comes rest, which men, being what they are, must 56 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. also demand. The analogy of nature, the needs of the body, the usages of life, the instincts of their being, leave them no choice in the matter, so long at least as sleep, holidays, old age, amusements, and the like, remain upon earth. But it is important to observe what rest really means. Physical science explains to us the allegorical assertion that God rested from His work, by showing that He ceased from the travails and birth-pangs of creative work, from the slow crushing power of ice and water, from the upheaval of surfaces, the submerging of continents, the gradual curbing and restraining the youthful powers of nature till she became answerable to man's control, or at least afforded him a foothold in her midst. So does moral science proclaim that man needs rest, not from work, but from the conditions under which work is carried on here, from the chaos, so to speak, of life. He is placed here to perform onerous tasks under painful conditions, and he desires, as the real source of rest, that change to a higher form of existence which every modern discovery (evolution more than any other), tends to make familiar to him, and a right conception of which takes all selfishness out of rewards, because in the light of science it is seen to be a regular, upward, orderly progress. That religion has yet to learn from science what are the true primary elements of rest, reward, and judgment, may be true, but it affords no ground for disbelieving in the great facts which religion teaches, though much for attempting to teach her to teach them better. The next great fact in man's existence which I shall adduce as proving the necessity of wishing for immortality, is the necessity under which he finds himself for loving ; Morality and Immortality. 5 7 and here it may be well to say a word or two upon the nature of love, for there is a kind of spurious sentimental view of it which I take leave to denounce as being (among other things) utterly unscientific. Love then is sometimes regarded as having its roots in simple self-sacrifice for the good of others, and Christianity is appealed to as giving weight to this opinion by those who are willing to accept a few " elegant extracts " from its moral teaching, while repudiating its historical truthfulness. Now the plain fact is, that whatever a plausible humanitarianism may say on the subject, the teachings of the Bible and of science agree in representing the essence of love to be rooted in the delight or benefit which the thing loved conveys to him who loves it. God, says the Bible, saw that the world was "good," that is, a source of delight to its Creator. Men love their fellows, says science, ultimately and originally from the same instinct that teaches animals (and for that matter the vegetable world also) to love those in whom they find com- fort, pleasure, and support. Everywhere love is measured by and pre-supposes a self-conscious " I," so that in its deepest and most natural utterance men are commanded to love their neighbours as themselves.* And the whole effect of religion, as historically developed in the Bible, is, while keeping this natural self-love in mind, to raise men up to true, that is, to divine conceptions of what real pleasure, comfort, and support consist in, and to show how they are to be obtained. The life of Christ answers both questions by declaring that goodness is the only thing really worthy of love, and that this must be created * And yet we could not apply this standard or formula to the love of God (see p. 10). I prefer to leave the discrepancy, if such there be, unsolved. 58 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. in others by self-sacrifice on our part, so that we may enjoy their goodness. He revealed the perfect working of the law of self-sacrifice, namely, to give up everything for the cause of human goodness, that humanity might become delightful to God and to itself. It avails very little to enter into bewildering discussions as to whether this idea of self-sacrifice is or is not as noble as the one which contemplates entire destruction and abnegation of self as a being conscious of the results of its own sacrifice, but it is surely of the greatest importance to discern which idea has its foundation in fact and law. And if the theory of evolution be true, then what Butler called " reasonable self- love " is found to be a natural instinct, shared with the animals, from which man can no more emancipate himself than he can give himself a new parentage, though of course this instinct requires to be made " reasonable " by the teachings of morality and religion throughout the progress of humanity. Therefore whatever a transcendental philo- sophy may say (such philosophy having no foundation in the realm of fact), men will continue to love that which is good to them, just because it is good to them, and religion will continue to teach them what goodness is, and how they are to create it in others by their own self-sacrifice. I beg my readers to observe the force of this argument. It is one of the many instances in which the verdict of science is given in favour of religion, and, it must be added, of common sense. If Mr Darwin's account of the origin of morality in the social affections be true, then, by the law of man's being, love must have a conscious reference to self and cannot be mere self-abolition and annihilation. Exactly this the Bible recognises as true of the love of the Morality and Immortality. 59 Creator, and recounts in history as true of the love of the Redeemer, who will " take his friends to himself, that where he is they may be there also." And exactly this the daily experience of common life testifies to as being true of the love which binds human souls together. The desire for immortality lies imbedded in the primary instincts of our nature. If to any human soul any other soul is dear or pleasant in one word, good then that soul cannot choose but crave lor a continuance of such love after death. A man may of course rid himself of these desires, because he has an unbounded power of perverting his nature, resisting experience, and doing violence to facts. But wherever the course of human life is true to the law of nature as expounded by science and enforced by religion, there love will be an intimation of immortality. And so in fact we find it to be, though details that would require a volume must here be discussed in a few sentences. Take, for instance, as a type of the love of equals in age, that of married life. Its essence is that it is progressive. It deepens with the deepening forces of life, and grows with the growth of years. All common labours, trials, joys, and cares, form so many links invisible but real that are binding souls together. The memory of the past and the anticipations of the future fuse two souls into one common life, one moral being, and yet they are haunted by the dim sense of approaching change, that breathes in the words, " There 's something flows to us in life, But more is taken quite away ; Pray, Alice, pray, my darling wife, That we may die the self-same day." And so the thought of final separation becomes impossible. That love should perish they resent as the worst of bias- 60 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. phemies. The inspired genius of St Paul, which shed light upon every aspect of the spiritual world, exactly as Shakespeare upon the world of man, or Newton upon the world of nature, saw this when he called Christ the "husband" of the Church, that is, of humanity. Take again the love of parents for children, as seen especially in the case of those who die young. They will not endure to part for ever with the object of so much hope, labour, and care. They know that there is no such thing as death, in the sense that anything perishes entirely, and that a dead body is but resolved into other forms, and so passes into new life. Modern materialists wax eloquent on the eternity of force or matter, and I for one can sympathise with them. But then I crave leave, again with St Paul, to carry this truth into the analogous domain of moral life also. A child may have a power hidden within its brain capable of moving the world, and it dies before it utters a word. There must be use for this power also in a world in which there is no waste ; so love declares and triumphs over death. At death, physical power passes into new modes of existence ; if so, then why should not spiritual power also in both cases to carry out the dictates of what we see to be an universal law ? To desire the immortality of a dead child does not indeed require any such analogy ; men desire it because to do so is true to the instincts of nature and to the facts of their creation. It was some such instinct as this that, in spite of the national uncon- sciousness of immortality, touched the heart of David with a vague sense of a life to come, and suggested words that meant so much more than he could grasp, " I shall go to him, but he will not come back to me." Morality and Immortality. 6 1 The same may be said of the love of children for parents; indeed, the parent is to the child the very idea and possessor of immortality, merely because it is the fountain of his life. We might parallel David's yearning for his child with Augustine's love for his mother. But enough has been said to indicate that, left to themselves and to nature, men do and will desire immortality, that they may continue to love and be loved in turn. To strengthen and purify this love in families, and then in wider circles of neighbourhood, country, Church, Christianity, and humanity itself, is the office of religion. It is here emphatically, that men are asking for morality at her hands, and are being put off with theology and ceremonies. If religion can succeed in making men moral in respect of such things as these, they will, if I may so speak, make themselves immortal. People who love cannot bear to die, and people who do not love, have by the nature of the case, no wish to live. As Arthur says, " Thou hast not made my life so sweet to me, That I, the king, should greatly care to live.'" If a man came to me in anxiety as to his own immortality, and desiring arguments to convince his reason, I should be inclined to ask him upon what terms he was living with his wife, his children, his parents, and his neighbours. And it is because religion, occupied as it is in teaching men of one school to " save " their souls, and of another to " make " them, has got no real voice or power in that which makes up so large a part of the normal life of ordinary men, that they are beginning to seek for instruction and morality elsewhere. I proceed next to consider the effects of another great fact in human life upon man's desires for immortality ; I 62 Reconciliation o Religion and Science. mean the sense of sin, or in less theological words, the consciousness of evil. And, here once more I will endea- vour to adduce nothing more than the simplest truths of everyday experience. The first consciousness of evil comes to men in the order of nature, when they realise that they have done irreparable wrong to other people. They have done mischief in the world, set a train of evil going which they have no power to stop, corrupted others, done them harm, and added their contribution to the great heap of human error, folly, and crime. And in so doing they have offended against a law of goodness and beneficence, which may be expressed in these terms : that if all men were good, then all men would be happy. Therefore, the first desire is to be brought into harmony with the law of good- ness in religious terms, to be reconciled to God. But then this desire for pardon, which has assumed such dispro- portionate, not to say monstrous, forms in modern theology, is soon followed by another ; for mere pardon is nothing if the evil still continues ; to save one's soul, a very poor thing if souls that one has helped to ruin remain in ruins. And so the next demand is for another state of things altogether, for a world in which there shall be, if not per- fection, at least progress towards perfection, so that the results of evil shall die and fall away, or be seen to have wrought out the purposes of God. Thus, from the simple consciousness of evil, men spring upwards to the desire for immortality, for if there be no life after death with a trans- muting harmonising power belonging to it, then the evil they have done remains perpetual, running throughout all genera- tions of men, not to be washed away by any amount of repentance, or counteracted by any good actions in other Morality and Immortality. 63 directions : a thought which is simply unbearable, the agony of which is generally the first prelude to that literature of immortality which we call prayer. Or again, a man reaches the same desire for perfection in a life to come, when he regards not so much the evil that he has done as the evil that is in him. He sees in himself bound- less capacities for good, as though he had all the makings of a perfect man in him, and yet he is constrained by an evil power over which he longs to gain a decisive victory. Professor Huxley's whimsical desire to be wound up like a clock every morning, in order that his moral being may perform its functions with mechanical regularity, has at least this about it, that it expresses, from the scientific point of view, a theory of moral duty, which corresponds pretty closely to the religious hope of heavenly perfection. And the same idea of perfection, man, when he looks abroad, finds everywhere present, only broken up in bits and scattered abroad among different men. If something could be taken from one man and added to another, if the self- devotion of Howard could be joined to the faculties of Julius Caesar, if things could be got out of disorder and confusion, then that idea might be realised, " That type of perfect in his mind In nature can he nowhere find ; He sows himself on every wind." Another fact of human experience completes the picture, and it is one that has exercised a profound influence upon the greatest souls. Man, gifted with an instinctive desire for justice, finds that there is no such thing in this present world, except what his own feeble endeavours may achieve. The contrast between the elaborate care with which society, 64 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. in the effort of self-preservation, seeks to mete out justice, and the indifference with which nature, or law, or chance, or fate (by whatever name we call it), mocks the vain attempt, is suggestive indeed, and has ever been felt as one of the greatest of the mysteries of life. The effects, for instance, of the destruction of Lisbon upon two such men as Goethe and Voltaire are a case in point. That men do not suffer because they specially deserve it, we know from the lips of Christ himself; and if there be another life we can acquiesce, although even so with difficulty, in that which it is hard to understand. Once more, however, I must say, that to my mind the doctrine of evolution, carried forward by analogy into the realms of spiritual life, suggests the explanation which later moralists and theologians will have to elaborate. A perpetual reaching forward into higher modes of life by means of catastrophe, death, sorrow, and suffering, fills men's souls with submission to the workings of a higher Will, while the hope of personal participation in the higher life, satisfies their cravings for justice to them- selves and others. Thus, then, it comes to pass that those whose sense of sin compels them to long for pardon, per- fection, and justice, will also continue to long for immor- tality, and will welcome the evidence which purports to establish it as a fact. And although the remark does not belong logically to the precise proposition I am endeavour- ing to make out, yet it would be doing injustice to the tremendous power which the argument has upon the human soul, if I did not observe in passing that the proof of the bare fact of immortality, derived from the Resurrec- tion of Jesus Christ, is bound up with a life, a character, and a teaching, that claim to meet, and, as Christian people Morality and Immortality. 65 think, succeed in meeting every natural requirement of man for power, rest, and reputation, for love and reunion, for pardon, perfection, and justice. Another class of arguments is derived from a totally different source from those we have been considering, and possesses even more value from the strictly scientific point of view. It may no doubt, to a certain extent, be contended that these facts of human nature and experience may be modified and altered to an extent almost inconceivable at present ; and I readily admit that if a morality more suit- able to man's wants, and more true to his nature, can be devised, he will cease to believe in his own immortality. But then, I also affirm that no trace of such morality has yet been propounded in theory, much less been wrought out in practice ; and what is more to the point still, I maintain that so far scientific discovery goes to show that the facts which lead to a belief in immortality are rooted in the con- stitution of man. The next class of arguments, however, has to do with the external world, with our material sur- roundings in a word, with the home in which we find our- selves placed. Now, from the impressions thence arising there is no escape, as there need be no mistake about their meaning. Man's home is prepared and provided for him, and just as differences in scenery or climate work ineradicable distinctions upon the minds and bodies of those who are subject to them, so is humanity at large subject to impressions from nature and from external con- ditions, which are simply unavoidable. The world is not ours to make or unmake ; it forces itself in upon us through eye, ear, and brain, and is in truth a real Revelation, a word from that power which is not man, and is therefore, 66 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. in the words of religion, God. Now, endeavouring once more to grasp an immense subject within a few convenient divisions, what are the things that man, both in fact and by right, asks of the world in which he lives ? I answer, to know it, to use it, and to enjoy it, because these correspond to man as a scientific, an industrial, and an artistic being. Nor shall I be prevented from asserting that the same conceptions floated through the mind of the writer or writers of the book of Genesis, in the allegory which re- presents the first man as giving names to the beasts, tending the garden, and living in an earthly paradise. First, then, man desires to know the earth on which he lives, and which seems to be ever inviting him to know her better. Nature lies open, as it were, to the embrace of the human mind, not tendering any information about herself, but yielding it to the pursuer after that truth which is nature's word for love. But it is when men contrast the possibility of unbounded knowledge with the reality of their actual information that the desire for another life is generated, and this in more ways than one. Many, for instance, are absolutely, not to say shamefully, ignorant of common scientific* truths, because nature (even when bountiful to them in other respects) has denied them the time, or the faculties, or the education, or the inclination for the pursuit of scientific knowledge. Speaking for my- self, I may confess that the desire to be put to school, and, if necessary, to a sharp school too, to learn something more about the creation of God, stirs within me a longing for * The word is here used, as it is occasionally in this volume, where necessary, in its narrower sense of "natural" science. Generally, of course, it is used simply to describe the process by which knowledge is gained from facts by reasoning. Morality and Immortality. 67 immortality hardly inferior to the desire for pardon or rest. Those, again, whose lives are devoted to scientific studies can hardly refrain, if they give utterance to their true con- victions, from hoping that they may share in the " eternal " knowledge ; nor will they welcome as a higher morality the teaching that they ought to be content to believe that men will learn after they are dead, and that it is selfish and unnatural to seek for a participation in the harvest of that knowledge, of which in patience and faith they sowed the seeds. But there is yet another and a stronger argument still to be stated, and it is this : Nature proclaims distinctly that there are secrets quite beyond the range of human faculties to discover. The origin of life, the mystery of thought, the essential meaning of " law," are instances that will at once occur to every one. " In ultimate analysis," says Professor Huxley, "everything is incomprehensible, and the whole object of science is simply to reduce the fundamental incomprehensibilities to the smallest possible number." But however we may reduce them, the desire to know the residue will still remain as an intimation of immortality, just as the confession of the existence of the incomprehensible affords a basis for religious faith. The incomprehensible that is God : to know it that is life eternal. Elsewhere he says that " he does not know, and never hopes to know," the connection between the mental process of thought and the physical process of the brain. These words seem to me at once entirely scientific and entirely unscientific, They are the former, because they are evidently meant to take a candid and accurate estimate of the facts of the case ; they are the latter, because any confession of hopeless ignorance upon problems that are 68 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. presented to human intelligence, and come within expe- rience, is an absolute contradiction to the spirit of science. If we read them with the addition of a simple religious phrase, as follows, " I never hope to know IN THIS LIFE," then they still remain true to the facts of the case, while leaving scope to that spirit of inquiry from which all life departs the moment limits are set to its aspirations. No man has any business to confess hopeless ignorance of any- thing whatever. In this saying, therefore, I think I detect science melting into religion, and bearing unconscious witness to man's desire for an immortality in which he shall no longer "know in part, but know even as he is known." Furthermore, the confession of ignorance lies at the root of the poetry of nature, and accounts for its Pantheistic or Polytheistic tendencies. Poetry takes up the tale exactly where science lays it down. When once we have discerned the existence of the Incomprehensible, then a voice is heard in the breathing of winds, the mur- muring of waters, in all the teeming prodigality of life, in all the tremendous powers of destruction, the words of which, when interpreted by a religious mind, seem to recall a promise once given by the Master of nature and humanity Himself, " What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter." Man's right to use the world is but another expression for that instinct of civilisation which found its first utter- ance in the words of the ancient writer, who represents God as bidding men go forth and replenish the earth, and subdue it. The key-note thus struck of the true harmony between God, man, and the world, was never wholly lost in the Jewish mind, and presents another bond of union be- Morality and Immortality. 69 tween it and modern thought. The same spirit is breathed in many of the Psalms, notably in the noble and exalted language of the eighth "Thou hast put all things in sub- jection under his feet" language which, when contrasted with the actual facts of the case, suggested to the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews the hope of a future immortality to be realised in Christ, " crowned with glory and honour." Every word of this seems to me to be a prophecy, in the true sense of the word (that is, a presentiment of an inspired mind), of the modern spirit of industrialism and civilisation. But when men possessed by this idea begin to reflect that under any circumstances many generations must pass before there is an approach to the fulfilment of their hopes, and that there is much reason for thinking that ultimately the world will be exhausted in man's service, its treasures used up, and itself relapsed into chaos; then it seems impossible for them not to desire a further life, in which this contradiction, having fulfilled its work in the great process of evolution, shall have disappeared. Lastly, in respect of the enjoyment of nature, I must refer my readers to its legitimate exponents, poets and painters. The argument of Wordsworth's famous ode is capable of being expressed in logical forms, but assuredly would gain no weight from being thus treated. A solid fact, which would be none the more impressive from being dragged forth, lurks under Shelley's lines of one who does " Not heed nor see, what things they be But from these create he can, Forms more real than living man, Nurslings of immortality." But if I might make the attempt in humble prose, I would 70 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. say that men who view nature with the poet's mind, or through the medium of his descriptions, do in sober fact get themselves involved, as it were, in the consciousness of God and of Immortality. The down- flutter of an autumn leaf, the patient field resting its winter's rest, the curve of a stream, the far-off echo of a solitary wave, a lonely tree these, and a thousand other such things, cause the human soul to bow down before the altar of God, and swell with the thoughts of ages past and to come. The mystery of love, of labour, of purity, of judgment, and of power shines around, and the thought of God drifts into the mind through a thousand channels. And yet men cannot enjoy nature enough or understand her aright ; she is seen to be doing something for them which must be finished before it can be either enjoyed or understood in all its perfection. A poem of Mr Browning's, " Two in the Campagna," illus- trates this idea, and its closing words bring out the inevitable contrast between what man has and what he wants : " Only I discern Infinite passion and the pain Of finite hearts that yearn." So far, then, science, civilisation, and poetry add their contribution to man's desire for immortality. But it must be remembered that man does not merely live in a world which by its nature and laws suggests the possibility of another life to come, but rather amidst a universe of worlds which suggests the very place and mode of future exist- ence, and makes it impossible for him to confine his aspirations to this " dull spot which men call earth." A modern writer denounces Napoleon's appeal to the stars " Very true, gentlemen, but who made all these ? " as the Morality and Immortality. 7 1 most inconclusive reply ever made since the days when Berkeley was refuted with a grin. If by this is meant that the existence of other worlds can afford no demonstra- tion for the existence of a Creator which is not already afforded by the world in which we live, and further, that such demonstration does not amount to evidence that science can deal with, then I agree with him, though the somewhat needless strength of the protest does but engender confusion in a discussion in which everything depends upon the parties in it clearly understanding what each other means to assert. And what is meant by arguments of this nature (however rhetorically they seem to assert more) is, that so long as the stars exist, no merely negative argu- ment will avail to hinder men from wishing to believe in a personal Creator and an eternal life. It is striking, more- over, to observe how all progress in knowledge fortifies and gives assurance to this desire. Science puts forth a falter- ing hand towards the mystery of what may be man's future home, just as faith sends an anxious hope heavenward. We now know something, and hope to discover more about the stars ; not merely that they obey the same laws of motion, but that their composition, so far as it is yet investigated, resembles that of the earth ; and thus a more keen and vivid interest in them is excited which will assuredly modify the scientific mind by creating a link between this world and others, or, in religious words, between the finite and the unknown infinite, between earth and heaven. The same idea is also forced upon us by the limited use and enjoyment which we have of the starry universe, which, though far away from us, and, as it were, unconscious of us, does nevertheless come within the scope 72 Reconciliation of Religion and Science, of our mental and moral being, and suggests to us an irrepressible hope for a share in the larger life which it seems at once to predict and to contain. In plain words, no man can see a thing of beauty, majesty, and grandeur, without desiring a further and fuller acquaintance with and enjoyment of it. We shall gain nothing by robbing men of the natural hope that somewhere and somehow in the midst of so vast a universe room may be found, in the order of development by the law of evolution, for him and his. Much, on the other hand, may be gained if the proper office of religion is forced upon those who teach it that is, if science, adopting the natural hopes of men as facts of humanity, insists that religion shall strip immortality of all sentimental, foolish, unworthy, and sensuous accessories, and shall describe it in the brief Puritanic fashion of the Bible as a "new heaven and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness." There remain two points of considerable importance to be discussed. First, if the desire for immortality be so rooted in the constitution of man as I have been endeavour- ing to show, how comes it that many minds, even of the highest order, and, at present, in increasing numbers, should be without it ? and secondly, can it be shown to have any practical effect upon human morality that could not be obtained in any other way ? The answer to these questions will lead us to consider the abuse and use of the doctrine. One difficulty, indeed, which I have been astonished to find seriously felt, may be dismissed at once. It is urged that nations of antiquity did not possess the consciousness of immortality, and that many savages do not possess it now ; but surely it is a reason for believing it to be true, Morality and Immortality. 73 that the truth about it has grown up gradually. We might just as reasonably be surprised that the arts of cultivation have not always been practised, or the use of steam under- stood. The knowledge of immortality was not put into each man's soul at the beginning (a most unscientific con- ception), but grew by virtue of the same laws as led men to discover musical harmony, family life, or natural causa- tion : nor does the fact of a special objective revelation in the " fulness of time " in the least interfere with the true bearings of the analogy between the progress of religion and civilisation. And, like all other good things, this knowledge grows, whether in the consciousness of mankind or of individuals, in proportion to their energy, their industry, and their zeal for truth. A different reason must, however, be found for the fact that good and great men have renounced the hope of immortality after it has been distinctly put before them. And yet here, too, the answer is not difficult to find. Recurring to the three typical instances mentioned in the last essay Moses, Buddha, and Julius Caesar we discern at once the law underlying the unconsciousness or denial of a life to come. In each case it arose from the abuse of the tremendous spiritual force placed in the hands of religion by man's belief in a future state, for all history goes to show that if religious belief becomes corrupt or false, the truest and noblest souls are thrown into some form of opposition, which again reacts favourably upon religion herself. Thus the thought of judgment to come did not prevent the Egyptians from being sensual, cruel, and superstitious; rather it was employed to give a fictitious sanction to some of the worst tendencies of human nature. 74 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. Therefore the Jewish people were called under Moses to be the spiritual worshippers of one righteous God, and to build up a commonwealth owning no King but Jehovah ; nor is it at all wonderful that, having a very practical and pressing work to do in this world, nothing was said to them about the next. The hope of the Messiah was to be to them a substitute for that of immortality, and the temporal fortunes of the kingdom took the place of judgment to come. In a word, the knowledge of immortality had been so debased by the Egyptians that it was withheld from the people through whom God was laying the foundation of a religion that was to make men good. The examples of Buddha and of Caesar illustrate from immensely different points of view the same law. Like Moses, Buddha was a reformer, and the preacher of a new religion ; like him, he revolted from the depraved morality of his times, by which the demon of priestcraft was turning to its own purposes man's natural hope of a life to come. His work and teaching, need it be said, fill an important and necessary place in the history of religion, especially when we remember the surrounding tendencies, which centuries afterwards culminated in the gross and immoral conceptions of a Mahometan paradise. It is only by running into extremes that the balance of forces in religion and morals (there is something akin to this in nature also) can be sustained, until some truth emerges which har- monises apparent contradictions. Julius Caesar once more represents the same law at a different stage of its history ; that is, at a time when the greatest minds, cast in a secular, and not in a religious mould, can only show that the religion of the day is worthless to them by revolting Morality and Immortality. 75 from it altogether. It was surely for nothing but good at any rate it was necessary by the law of continuous moral development that Paganism should be seen to have lost its hold upon men like him. Here, again, we have the same state of things: a religion founded on emotions, fancies, legendary tales, and perverted for immoral purposes by the priestly spirit which then, as ever, assumed to keep the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And I make bold to say that Christianity, while claiming to reveal immortality as a simple fact, did nevertheless follow the example of the older religious movements in this, that it reduced the doctrine to the fewest and plainest moral conceptions, and called men's attention to the practical duties and work of life. The kingdom of heaven which Christ founded, and the keys of which the Apostles did in sober fact hold, was not that to which later (and, in their time, perhaps needful) notions have reduced it a blissful state to be enjoyed hereafter by the chosen few but was in its essence the establishment of God's rule, order, and righteousness upon earth, to be continued hereafter in other spheres of thought and action. It would be amusing, were it not inexpressibly saddening, to see how the whole stand-point of the Messiah has been unconsciously changed by those who have claimed to represent His teaching throughout Christian times ; but it is a question which does not immediately concern us now. To sum up the whole argument, it is plain that the law of evolution applies to religious as well as to physical development, and accounts for the rise of different types, each of which has arisen out of surrounding circumstances, to meet pressing wants, to do a special work, to preserve 76 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. one side or portion of the truth of humanity. And a Christian clergyman may be pardoned for adding the expression of his own personal belief that in religion, as in nature, there is a " survival of the fittest." The application of the law to this present day is, I should hope, clear enough. There are men, in every way entitled to be heard, who disavow all necessity for a belief in immortality as a motive for duty or a part of humanity. And (a far worse sign) it is plain that, whereas many men hold this belief as a doctrine, it has the slightest possible hold upon them, and does not enter into their lives as an animating and consoling faith. Religion invents a hundred reasons to account for this, and to conceal her own fault. These, shallow and unreal as they are, are often no more than a mere statement of the fact in other words, or empty lamentations over the depravity of human nature, which are just as reasonable as the complaint of a doctor that his patients persist in dying. We hear, for instance, that the tendency of science is to make men materialists, and to crush spiritual life ; that it is a revolutionary age in which people like to shock their friends by extravagant assertions ; that disappointment and failure cause men to give in and despair of justice and righteousness to come ; that the intellect is more thought of than the heart, and knowledge held of more account than duty. All which does not touch the root of the matter ; indeed, it is a mere evasion to lay the blame upon human nature, or the cir- cumstances of the times, or the spirit of the age, instead of holding those responsible to whom the care of Christianity is committed that is, Christians themselves. By their own confession, or rather claim, the duty of bringing men to Morality and Immortality. 7 7 believe in immortality as revealed in Christ, devolves upon them ; and if, for any want of moral right or intellectual truth, the duty is not fulfilled, the blame must rest upon them, and not upon the world or the age which they have failed to convert. I have no desire, however, of entering upon the unwel- come task of drawing up the indictment against the religion of the day ; enough to say that Christian teaching, practices, politics, morality, and society, in respect of such virtues as self-sacrifice, sympathy, union, love of truth, and the like, must bear the responsibility for what goes amiss in respect of the belief in immortality. This truth has precisely the same effects upon those who believe it, as the hope of inheriting a large estate has upon the heir when young. If he be selfish, weak, and indolent, it will do him harm ; if otherwise, the knowledge of future responsibilities will make him doubly watchful and industrious. Therefore, the world at large looks to see what are the moral and intellectual effects of the doctrine of immortality in accord- ance with a certain wise saying, " By their fruits ye shall know them." The point is not that outside observers detect flagrant inconsistencies between men's lives and their beliefs, which, though a common, is, in the case at any rate of " thinkers," a most absurd excuse for infidelity ; but it is that the very belief itself is perceived to have a bad and perverting effect upon the mind and morals of those who hold it ; in plain words, men are beginning to suspect that the hope of immortality is ceasing to make people good. And that this is the case to a large and growing extent, who that knows anything of current opinions upon the secret of happiness, the principles of 78 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. God's judgment, the nature of eternity, can venture to doubt? But then, the same law which teaches that reaction follows upon a corruption of religion, and in turn creates a reformation, explains also within what limits the reformation will work. Evolution means progress as well as destruction, and when certain truths have once clearly emerged, and been satisfactorily established, they, however perverted they may have become, will survive as the basis of the new teaching. Thus, it is extremely significant to observe that when Luther confronted the old evils in the most aggravated form, he was not obliged to cut men off altogether from the consciousness of immor- tality, but only to reform, and in a measure rationalise it. It has been once for all, so we believe, brought to light by the Resurrection, and has become an abiding possession of the human race ; therefore, although man's weakness and folly, or the inevitable corruptions of time, may still drive souls into revolt, yet religion will always be able to reform herself upon this basis, and will never cease, so long as she exists, to believe in immortality as defined, explained, and demonstrated by Jesus Christ. We are now to consider the moral use of the belief in im- mortality in answer to the challenge whether it exercises any special effects upon human conduct which can be obtained in no other way. It is at once tempting and easy to answer that the great mass of weak and ignorant men require some such motive as this to enable them to struggle upwards into a higher moral life ; but it must be confessed that this answer would carry no weight with those to whom these arguments are addressed. A belief in immortality, it would be urged, may have its relative and temporary uses until Morality and Immortality. 79 the world at large becomes philosophical ; but that does not prove it to be true in the most real sense, and to the highest minds. Still, it must be remembered that this consideration has of all others the most legitimate and powerful influence with minds that are already disposed to embrace religious truth, and all that is required is that Christian advocates should perceive to what uses it may be logically and fairly put. For ourselves, and for our present purpose, we must look elsewhere. And examining the moral tendencies of an age in which the hope of immor- tality is waxing faint, we find that there is a growth of evil exactly in those directions which a more vivid consciousness of a life to come would tend to check ; these are (amongst others) materialism, revolution, and despair, having a rough correspondence to the old division of flesh, world, and spirit. It is needless to say that nothing can be attempted more than the briefest mention of the facts that mark the growth of these tendencies. Concerning the first it is enough to indicate what every newspaper confesses and deplores. Over-eating and drinking (the former attributed to the highest intellectual circles) : barbaric splendour in dress and equipment ; the gradual invasion of the professional classes by the spirit of money-making (I know nothing more sad than to see how men . coin their brains into money, and call it success) ; the resistance to diminished hours of work by the employing classes ; sensuousness in art, poetry, and religion, the latter becoming more and more a thing of materialistic mysteries and ceremonial show, all these are some of the admitted signs of the times which wise people view with regret and alarm. Something 8o Reconciliation of Religion and Science. of this sort surely lies at the root of Professor Huxley's protest that he is not a materialist. Now surely it is as capable of demonstration as anything of this nature can be, that the consciousness of a spirit that is, of continuous personal existence after bodily dissolution is a specific remedy for this disorder. Given a man anxious to raise himself above the dead level of his sensuous surroundings, feeling himself tempted and provoked to mere bodily . enjoyment, despising himself for being what he is, and yet not capable of any great moral and mental effort, and it is clear that no remedy could be devised so powerfully and precisely adapted to give him the requisite help and support as a distinct persuasion that he himself was an immortal being, distinct from and higher than his present body, from which his personality must be one day separ- ated, when the work of evolving a higher type of life was accomplished. People, it is to be feared, will continue to " eat and drink,'' if they are persuaded that " to-morrow they will die." The spirit of revolution is not very easy to define in words, but the expression is, perhaps, the best that could be chosen to describe that over-impatient zeal which, by a refinement of selfishness, causes men to do more harm than good in their attempts to make things better. Men find themselves in a world of injustice, inequality, suffering, and disorder, too often thinly cloaked under the name of law, and deriving a decent sanction from religion. And yet, though animated by an almost fanatical love of humanity, and ready to make any sacrifices in its behalf, they become in practice guilty of gross immorality and selfishness ; they give way to violent passions of hatred and revenge ; they Morality and Immortality. 8 1 adopt desperate schemes, sometimes foolish and sometimes wicked, of change and revolution ; practically they come to regard the happiness of men as coincident with the reign of their own unchecked supremacy ; and they die readily for an ideal humanity which they love, if only they may curse the actual human beings whom they hate. It is this mix- ture of good and evil in the better spirits of the Commune that divided the heart of feeling men with these mingled emotions of censure and sympathy best expressed in the single word pity ; but thinking men may well set themselves to work to discover the cause why persons so possessed by the desire to do good to mankind should be capable of doing so much harm. And yet, after all, the reason lies upon the surface. Revolution is not the cause of the decay of the belief in immortality, but exactly the reverse is the case. Let us put ourselves in the position of one who thinks that this life is his only one, who is, at any rate, sure that it is the only one he cares for. He sees its blessings and advantages unequally distributed, withheld from him- self, his friends, or his class. Shall he then be cheated out of the one existence he can call his own ? Better that everything should be pulled down now, at once, without delay, in the hope that the good may come to him ; surely some change, radical and immediate, in the laws of govern- ment and property, or in the rulers of the State, will give him the enjoyment he desires. Now, to such a cry of agony, with which it must be a callous soul that can find no point of sympathy, the one only sufficient answer is that this life is not the only one, but a progress towards another and a better one. If science, as expounded by Mr Darwin, gives a true account of the origin of man's social instincts, F 82 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. then the desire to share in the welfare of our race is im- bedded in our constitution, and is not to be satisfied by the shadowy hope of a fleeting reputation after death, or by a mere self-approval, or by the thought that men may be better and happier when we are gone. False religion, with its perpetual depreciation of the world and humanity, inculcates a tame acquiescence in hardship and wrong, and so drives men into that negation of religion which cannot acquiesce in anything. True religion, on the contrary, by setting forth a future world to be evolved out of men's moral and spiritual exertions and experiences here, creates that spirit of divine patience, self-sacrifice, and above all, self-control, which can die at least as bravely as the other, and leave with its parting breath, and in its abiding moral influences, a blessing, and not a curse behind it. And as the belief in immortality confronts the revolution- ary spirit with the power of patience, so does it breathe hope into the spirit of despair. What turns some natures to madness causes others to retire heart-broken from all con- flicts and labours that have humanity for their object, and produces the feeling that in Pagan times found its last and most mournful expression in self-destruction. Suicide, then too often the last and applauded action of noble minds, has become in Christian days the meanest and most despised resource of the weak and feeble, and this contrast measures the extent of the practical good that religion has done for morality in setting forth a life to come. Napoleon's final reason for not committing suicide after his abdication is a curious illustration of this " Moreover," he said, " I am not altogether destitute of religious sentiment." If humanity, Morality and Immortality. 83 and each man that comprises it, is to be developed through many stages, then the work of each stage becomes inexpres- sibly important, and to abandon it is to abandon the future as well. But if all ends here, and failure here means fail- ure absolute and perpetual, then I know not what should prevent a man who has clearly realised what failure is from saying with Brutus at Philippi, " Certainly we must fly, but with our hands, and not with our feet." It is necessary to make one more remark, or rather to repeat one already made, before I close. The case for im- mortality may have seemed so strong as to suggest the pos- sibility of dispensing with positive evidence, as though the Resurrection could not make it much more certain than it is. Now this is a state of mind with which it is incum- bent upon science to wage incessant warfare. Wherever the positive evidence is nil, that is, where no instance of the conclusion desired can be adduced, then the more vehe- ment, universal, and what is called " natural," the desire is, the more certain is it that men are the victims of their own delusions, the more likely they are to allow themselves to j form erroneous conceptions of life and work, the more im- ' peratively it becomes the duty of positive thought to warn them against the evil results of believing what they wish to believe. If a thing be true, there must have been some in- stance sufficient to establish it as a fact throughout the course of ages; failing this, immortality sinks to the level of the elixir of life or the philosopher's stone, a thing much desired, but having no existence in the solid ground of fact, and a fruitful source of misleading errors and mis- directed labours. Or at best, it might be admitted to be possibly true, if it were debarred from exercising any vital 84 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. influence upon human conduct. I am, of course, well aware that the same remark in an altered form may be applied to the evidence afforded by Christianity, and the assertion that men believe the Resurrection only because they wish to be- lieve it, is one that may be fairly made and must be honestly met. But then there is no reason why it should not be met ; we are here upon the solid ground of events and evidence ; we can discover for ourselves who are the witnesses, what they say, and whether they are dressing up a tale to satisfy their own desires for a future life. To believe a fact for which there is not a scintilla of positive evidence, because we de- sire it, is one thing ; to believe the evidence for a fact, be- cause we desire it, is another and very different thing. The former must be scientifically wrong ; the latter may or may not be right : and time is the only ultimate arbiter in the contest. I have now brought to a close this rapid, and I fear I must add, perfunctory survey of the conditions and circum- stances of human life as they bear upon man's desire for im- mortality. I have taken the best pains I could to draw my conclusions from indubitable facts of human experience and consciousness by a process of reasoning which would satisfy the demands of the logic of science. What I think I have proved is this : that it is in accordance with man's natural in- stincts and with the necessities of morality, that he should desire a life to come ; and that this being so, he will welcome, in spite of its indispensable supernatural element, the evi- dence of historical fact, which purports to prove it, and so attempts to rescue humanity from a maimed, unnatural, and lifeless condition. Much that has been said may appear trite enough, but it has been placed, I hope, under a new light, Morality and Immortality. 85 and been read under the influences of those mental concep- tions and that theory of the universe which the doctrine of evolution has made familiar to the minds of men. In such cases details are everything, and to work out the details may afford labour and satisfaction to the science of religion for years to come. But this will be impossible so long as religion and science remain apart in a defiant and disdainful attitude, more anxious to spy out defects than to combine the truths special to each in one harmonious perfection. Any attempt, therefore, to apply the methods of science to the phenomena of religion, and thus to bridge the gulf between the two will be, I feel certain, candidly judged, if seen to have been candidly made. CHRISTIANITY AND IMMORTALITY. T T may be desirable to explain at. the outset what is the J- precise object of this essay, inasmuch as the title may be thought to cover much wider ground than I am at all disposed to enter upon. The relations of the Christian belief in the Resurrection of Christ to the doctrine of immortality, have been already pointed out, and do not need to be further discussed. That the Resurrection, if true, amounts to a scientific proof of immortality, that the witnesses for it are honest, and the testimony sufficient to prove any non-miraculous event, are statements which, even if they be challenged, I do not think it necessary to substantiate by additional arguments. Life after all is but short, and may be wasted in endless discussions upon matters perfectly obvious to all who are not blinded by invincible prejudice. The man who says, " I do not believe the history because it is avowedly supernatural," is, need it be remarked, an intellectually honest man, and deserves the most respectful attention. But the man who says, " I have no prepossessions against the supernatural, but I disbelieve the history upon exactly the same grounds as I should any ordinary statement ; " who tries, in short, to Christianity and Immortality. 87 reach Hume's conclusion without the resolute common sense that marked his method, must be dismissed as impracticable. There is, it must really be remembered, an enormous a priori probability attached to every straight- forward statement made by, apparently, honest men, which holds good in all cases where it is not balanced by some antecedent improbability, such as the existence of a super- natural element in the narrative. There is, indeed, a conceivable case in which a man might claim to be heard. If there be any one who believes that miracles have occurred more or less frequently, but that the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is not proved to be one of them, then the very absurdity of his position entitles him to be considered an honest thinker. But I deny that the term applies to any (if such there be) who do not, as a matter of fact, believe that miracles have occurred, and yet pretend to reject the Resurrection upon the ground that it is not proved by evidence sufficient to substantiate ordinary historical events. Some little impatience with the men who are constantly throwing up barriers against the progress of reason to right conclusions, or who try to direct her march into bye-ways formed by their own intellectual idiosyncrasies, is surely not altogether unjustifiable. But the task I have in hand is a much more serious and, to say the truth, a much more unwelcome one. I have let it be understood with tolerable plainness that, in my judg- ment, modern religious teaching is answerable for the errors, whether of disbelief or of superstition, which have gathered about the doctrine of man's immortality. Modern Christianity does not make the doctrine acceptable or use- ful to men, because it does not possess the mind of Christ, 88 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. and does not teach 'the nineteenth century the things which He taught the first. A kind of moral weakness and little- ness is creeping more and more over the minds of religious people ; and religious doctrines, once full of life and power, have become mere dogmatic negations of some error as unreal as themselves. Somehow or other the salt has lost its savour in the judgment of those to whom intellectual truth and practical morality are things of the first import- ance. I say this with the same kind of feelings that might inspire a French soldier to speak of the moral and profes- sional corruptions that plunged the French army into the depths of disaster. My life is bound up with the religion, to the faults of which it is impossible to shut our eyes. I am not insensible to the good works, the doing of which has come down to us as a tradition from the great Evan- gelical or Catholic revivals. I am keenly alive no less to the exalted history of the past than to the equally noble responsibilities and duties of the future ; but in spite of all this, or rather because of it, the truth requires to be pro- claimed aloud, that modern Christianity, as generally received, does not represent the teaching of Christ, and is not fit to be charged with the task of teaching the world a suitable and satisfactory morality. That this is true with respect to the doctrine of the immortality of the soul I now proceed to show. The popular conception of the religion taught by Jesus Christ a conception that underlies the doctrines and practices of all Christian churches is to the following effect : He came to reveal the facts of a future life, which, when revealed, are found to consist of an endless life of happiness or misery, our destinies therein being decided Christianity and Immortality. 89 by the relation which we hold towards Him. In this conception we must distinguish two erroneous notions : the first, that His teaching mainly concerned the next life ; the second, that it consisted in the proclamation of heaven and hell as the ultimate destiny of mankind. Of these, the first, though not so striking, contains a more subtle power of evil than the second, and will require care- ful examination. I must, however, first say a word in answer to the objec- tion that these conceptions have ceased vitally to affect the religion of the world, or can be said fairly to represent it. I am convinced that no greater mistake can be made. It may, indeed, be admitted that the belief in endless torments is ceasing to exercise a real influence upon men's minds, but even this admission must not be made too much of. In the Roman Church, and in many Protestant sects, it is still a predominant feature of religious teaching, while in none has it been formally withdrawn as an article of faith. It is, perhaps, thought that it may die out in silence ; but, apart from the moral cowardice this involves, all history seems to show that, when once a doctrine has laid firm hold of the popular mind, nothing short of active denunciation and determined opposition can destroy it. And then, too, it must be remembered that the system of theology of which it forms a cardinal point, still remains and flourishes. All the power of the priesthood, and all the logical value of the Calvinistic scheme of salvation, are really involved in ultimate ruin with the rejection of this doctrine. And again, though hell as a place of endless torment may be vanishing from men's minds, yet the idea of heaven as a place of endless happiness is almost as potent as ever go Reconciliation of Religion and Science. This seems to me the worst feature of all. Whatever may be said of the evils wrought by the fear of endless punish- ment, those wrought by the hope of endless happiness are certainly greater. The former is, at least, due to man's sense of the greatness of sin ; the latter is the result of his selfish desires for enjoyment. The fear of hell has kept many a rough, wayward spirit in something like conformity to decent behaviour, and it has unquestionably been the turning-point in thousands of lives, and the beginning of better things to men beyond the reach of any argument I save fear. But the common idea of heaven can claim no such moral achievements/while it has enfeebled the char- acter of myriads of human beings, and has ministered in \ the name of religion to human selfishness and love of ease. And if this assertion seems a strong one (as in truth I mean it to be), let any one who doubts whether it can be justified bethink himself of the hymns which have become more and more popular in these latter days. Sentimental longings for paradise, excessive, though easily understood amid the moral wretchedness of the middle ages, are now among the most marked features of modern praise. Sensuous descriptions of mere outward details, passionate longings for happiness and idleness, are put into the mouths of grave British citizens, whose one great virtue is to do their duty like men, and who hate idleness as the source of all evil. How far we may believe that the minds of men are really drawn off from the realities of life, or how far they are merely softened and diverted for the moment, depends upon the amount of practical weight we are willing to admit that religion now possesses. All I am concerned to observe is, that there are tendencies which Christianity and Immortality. 91 seem to be powerful, and are certainly popular, that are demoralising in the extreme. And lastly, as an additional proof that, however details may have been modified or abandoned, the general con- ception of the future life under the forms of heaven and hell is still a living part of the consciousness of man, I would point out how in times of earnest feeling it exercises a subtle influence upon the strongest minds. Two of the most eminent of living Englishmen, desirous of expressing themselves strongly in antagonism to popular notions, have done so by declaring their intention under certain circum- stances of " going to hell." It is odd, on the other hand, to read of a man like Descartes affirming that he was as desirous to go to heaven as any one. The very idea of the two, hell especially, has been engrafted in the minds of men by grotesque poetry and legends. All this is indeed compatible with the truth, which I do not for a moment deny, that there is a gradual loosening of the hold these beliefs once had upon the minds of men. What was once a tremendously-earnest conflict between the preacher and his hearer, in which neither of the two ever doubted that the stakes were the endless destiny of an immortal soul, has now shrunk into a kind of amicable contest, in which the latter easily stops every attempt made by the former to reach his heart by means of the fear of hell. Respect- able men no longer leave church with the same profound conviction that without conversion their damnation is assured, and so that the only practical question is, how long it can safely be postponed. But then this is just the state of things in which doctrines, the errors of which might well be pardoned in consideration of their effectual 92 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. moral power, have become nothing but pernicious. To confine all men's ideas of a future life to the one notion of decisive judgment, was certainly a mistake in the face of Christ's teaching, and of simple elementary moral truths. But to keep the idea of judgment before men's minds and force it upon their thoughts, had at least a useful deterrent effect. But now that this is practically vanishing, there remains but one duty for all who love the truth as Christ taught it, and to whom human morality is unspeakably precious. Once more we are face to face with a popular religion that abuses the tremendous fact of man's immor- tality to unworthy purposes. The second Reformation must treat heaven and hell as the first treated purgatory and indulgences : it must preserve the moral idea while abolishing the literal fact, and must supersede the old forms of thought by new conceptions, gathered from the experience and the discoveries of the ages, but founded upon a closer adherence to the actual teaching of Christ. In examining what the main characteristics of that teaching were it is of great importance to observe in what relations it stood to the common religious teaching of His time. To begin then, it is not in the least true to say that Christ was the first to stamp the idea of immortality upon the minds of men under the forms of heaven and hell. He found, indeed, those ideas already existing, and He used them for His own purposes ; but He took from them their future and remote, in order to give them a present and immediate, force and aspect. The Pharisees believed that the souls of good men would be for ever blessed (there is some doubt as to their ideas about the resurrection of the body), and that hell, or gehenna, would be the inevitable Christianity and Immortality. 93 portion of the wicked. These beliefs had grown up exactly on the soil that might have been expected to produce them. They were the fruit of that, taken as a whole, dark and melancholy period of Jewish history which intervenes between the return from captivity and the coming of the Messiah. As in the middle ages, so in these, which are the veritable middle ages of Jewish history, men had taken refuge from the intolerable miseries of life in the hope of paradise, and, powerless themselves to avenge the wrongs they endured, had fastened on the idea of endless and horrible torture in the world to come. In proportion as the ancient hopes of Israel became in the bad sense of the word merely secular, so, by a strange but easily explicable contrast, did the minds of men conceive the idea of immor- tality ; for, after all, a Messiah who should at some time restore their temporal greatness, could never satisfy the, yearnings of individual souls for eternity. Something, too must be ascribed to the influences of Paganism, to which they were ever after the Captivity increasingly subject; and thus it came to pass that the fierce wrath of the Jew against the enemies of his people or the apostates from his religion took, as it were, visible form in the purely Pagan idea which turned the valley of Hinnom into the symbol of the place of endless torment, and even placed the gates of hell within its limits. Add to this, that the virtues which were to win heaven were compliance with ceremonial observances invented or maintained by an arrogant priesthood, who grew rich and powerful by trading on the superstitions of mankind, and we have a picture of a religious teaching concerning immortality, on the one hand clear and definite, on the other corrupting 94 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. and demoralising, resembling, in short, all the worst epochs of spiritual degradation with which history makes us acquainted. How, then, did our Lord treat the religious ideas about immortality with which He was confronted ? Mainly, in two ways. First, He seized upon the current notions, and used the truths which they contained, to enforce a present heaven, an immediate judgment, a hell that was yawning to engulf the whole Jewish people. Secondly, He substi- tuted by act and word the fewest and simplest moral conceptions of a future state, in place of outward, local, and detailed descriptions of it. Or, speaking more gene- rally, He revived the old true Jewish belief in Messiah as the representative of God's government upon earth, and brought heaven down to men as the first and urgent preliminary to raising men one by one to heaven. He planted in the minds of His followers the necessity of a spiritual resurrection now, as being of far more consequence than that of bodily resurrection hereafter, and He recalled them from the contemplation of remote rewards and punishments to the tremendous realities that were already closing in around them. To make good this assertion it is, however, necessary to examine, with all needful brevity, the teaching of Christ concerning the Kingdom of Heaven, Hell, and Judgment, and then to note how few, how guarded, and how practical were His words upon the subject of the life to come. There are statements, which, though really new, are nevertheless confounded with truths that people have al- ways held, or at any rate believe that they have always held. Such, for instance, is the statement that by the Kingdom of Christianity and Immortality. 95 Heaven Christ meant almost, if not quite, exclusively the establishment of God's rule and order upon earth. Upon hearing this, people immediately bethink themselves that this is merely another way of saying that the Kingdom of Heaven means the Christian Church. But the error lies not so much in denying any true interpretation of these words, as in substituting a secondary and comparatively unimport- ant interpretation for the primary and true one. Practi- cally, the thought of heaven as part of the future life has swallowed up the thought of heaven as the rule of God upon earth. Popular theology is like a bad picture, in which all the foreground is blurred and confused, while the moun- tains in the background stand out in hard and unnatural distinctness. People think of Christ first as revealing a future heaven, and then, quite in a secondary sense, as establishing a community that should lead men into it. But the fact is that the foundation of the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, for its own sake, and for the present good of man independently of his future destiny, was the one great object of all His teaching ; and the more we exa- mine that teaching for ourselves, the more clearly we shall appreciate the truth of this assertion, and discern how en- tirely His soul was wrapped up in the work of the immediate present. As painted by the Master's hand, the picture is altogether clear and well defined in the foreground, while behind it the landscape fades away with a dim suggestive- ness, infinitely more subtle and impressive than the coarse, naturalistic details with which later human teaching has obscured the outlines faintly drawn by the divine hand, and just relieved from darkness by a few far-glancing rays darted forth from the divine inspiration. 96 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. The above remarks are necessary, if we would avoid the appearance of making a series of observations concerning Christ's teaching so obviously true, not to say commonplace, that every one will be inclined to believe he has always known them. The history opens with the announcement by John the Baptist, repeated by Christ, and put into the mouth of His messengers, that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand that it was shortly to be set up amongst them. The Sermon on the Mount, the first recorded instance of His public teaching, begins by declaring that the poor in spirit and in fact were the persons to whom it was spe- cially preached ; and a great reward in heaven, that is, in the new kingdom, was promised to those who were perse- cuted for His sake. How many thousands of sermons have been preached to account for the self-invented difficulty that God meant endless happiness to be the portion of the poor rather than of the rich! How many delusive hopes have been fostered in the minds of poor people by the thought that after a life of suffering here they would be re- warded by a life of enjoyment hereafter ! The key-note, however, thus emphatically struck in the first teaching, was never forsaken or altered. " The Kingdom of Heaven is among you;" "Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God;" " There be some of them that stand here that shall not taste of death till they see the Kingdom of God come with power " words which have exhausted the ingenuity of so- phistry to explain them away. And, again, we hear of Capernaum exalted into heaven, but to be cast down into hell at the speedy approach of that day of judgment in which it should be more tolerable for the cities of heathen- dom than of Israel. Or, once more, in one single passage, Christianity and Immortality. 9 7 the Jewish gehenna is distinctly named ,and the disciples are told that anything in the world, however dear, which causes them to stumble at the Kingdom of Heaven then preached, or, still worse, which causes them to make others stumble, must be resolutely cut away, lest they come to the doom described in prophetical language as the place of the valley of Hinnom, where the worm never ceases to fatten on the dead bodies from within, or the fire to consume them from without. These, then, are the notes of time expressly laid down by the Teacher himself. But the doctrine of the Kingdom of Heaven is expressly and specifically contained in a series of parables, many of which begin with the well- known words, "The Kingdom of Heaven is like." Read in the light of modern theology, these all have reference to the last day and to a future life; read in the light shed upon them by the above-mentioned marks of time, they speak of im- mediate judgment and of a present life, and can only be applied to the former by indirect and very often incor- rect references. The first group of parables, in St Matt, xiii., which explains the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, is plainly an account of the laws which govern the foundation and the progress of the Church on earth. In two of them, however, the notion of judgment is added; and I call attention to the parable of the Tares as containing the germ of all future misunderstanding of Christ's teaching. The field, He says, is the world (#007-109). Now, when, in the next verse, the unsuspecting English reader finds it said that the harvest is the "end of the world/' and in the verse after this, reference is made to the "end of this world/' he little thinks that the first word translated " world" 98 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. is quite a different word from that in the two latter instan- ces, though if he considered the matter for a moment even he might wonder how the harvest can possibly be the end of the field and not rather the end of the crop upon it. That this last is our Lord's meaning, as in truth it is the only one com- patible with common sense, is abundantly clear from the word used, alwv, which means age or dispensation, and answers, therefore, to the crop which was then growing upon the field of the world. The good seed is the children of Christ's Kingdom ; the bad seed is perverted Judaism ; the harvest is its coming complete downfall, to which surely may be added a glance at that break-up of all civil, social, and poli- tical order, when the genius of Paganism passed away at the destruction of the Roman Empire of the West. It is not necessary, once more let me remark, to deny that in a derived and mediate sense the moral truths expressed in the parable may be applied to all times and places, though even then a -strict interpretation would require us to limit the application to the existing world. But what it is of the greatest importance to understand, is that the actual vision that was before the mind of Christ was the destruction of Judaism, and perhaps of Paganism, together with the foun- dation of the Church ; and that, were there never to be another judgment upon earth, the parable would still be adequately fulfilled. And that this was the fulfilment of which He was thinking, we shall find abundant proof if we turn to a similar passage in the thirteenth chapter of St Luke, in which the establishment of the Kingdom of God is predicted. In this the Gentiles are represented as coming in from all quarters, while the Jews are thrust out with weeping and gnashing of teeth, the whole at Christianity and Immortality. 99 once suggesting and culminating in the lamentation over Jerusalem, " their house which is left unto them desolate." And all this prediction of coming temporal judgment seems to be, if not certainly in the words of Christ, at least in the mind of the Evangelist, connected with His answer to the question, " Lord, are there few that shall be saved ? " Before we pass on to consider the final prophecy in which the idea thus started is worked out in some of the grandest utterances that ever fell even from the lips of Him who spake as never man spake, I must call attention to cne parable upon the interpretation of which I am willing to stake the whole of my argument. It is the parable of the Labourers in the vineyard (2Oth chapter of St Matthew), one of the simplest and most practical of stories. If ever there was a parable easy to interpret, this ought to be the one. It stands between the lesson, twice declared, which the Lord meant to be derived from it " The first shall be last, and the last first." The circumstances which gave rise to it namely, the sorrowful going away of the rich young ruler, and Peter's question, " What shall we have therefore ? " are clearly stated. Yet, in spite of all this, misled by false con- ceptions of the Kingdom of Heaven, the commentators find it almost unintelligible. Assuming that the day's wage is endless happiness or heavenly reward in a life to come, they are met by the insuperable difficulty as to how murmurers can enjoy it or be fit for it, still less how the first can be last and the last first. And thus they are driven to all kinds of shifts, such as the unphilosophical notion of degrees of happi- ness. Now, all that is required is to regard our Lord as giv- ing a plain, moral description of what would take place at the establishment of His Kingdom upon earth. The departure ioo Reconciliation of Religion and Science. of the ruler suggests the reflection that it is hard for a rich man to enter into that Kingdom. This, again, suggests Peter's natural but dangerous question, to which the answer is given that in the Regeneration, in the coming new birth of humanity, they should share the labours and the glory of their Master, as in truth they have done, and that in place of those which they gave up they should have new spiritual relationships and possessions upon earth, together (elsewhere it is added, as though to admit no possible mistake) with persecutions. How abundantly this pro- mise was fulfilled we may conclude from the life of St Paul, who had children and brethren in every city, and to whom the whole world was, as it were, a home. But then He goes on to warn them not to let the mere desire for a reward debase their spiritual character, for in that case the men who, like the twelve, had been called first, might become last in moral goodness. And he illustrated this tendency by a simple story of every-day life containing just the one moral that religion dislikes to face, namely, that a life of outward service and real Christian work may, if not watched, end in an envious, selfish, murmuring disposition, concerning which he says nothing and implies nothing as to its ultimate destination ; but merely points out that it has missed the real blessedness of work, and has lost for all moral purposes its true reward, while strenuously seeking to obtain it. We now come to the group of prophecies and parables which form the close of His teaching. And here we notice an important note of time occurring at a critical moment of the history. On His way to Jerusalem for the last time He delivered the parable of the Pounds, to counteract a delusion on the part of His disciples that the Kingdom of Christianity and Immortality. 101 God should immediately appear. Up to this moment, then, this had been the natural result of His teaching and of the wide success with which it had been attended. Now, there- fore, it becomes'necessary to make it clear to them that this coming is to be a work of time and labour, and that they are to be employed in it during His absence according to the measure of their several capacities. The mental view is gradually enlarging, the horizon is receding farther into the distance, while yet the main interest is attached to the immediate present. Then He enters Jerusalem, and begins that last contest with the Pharisees which ended in His death. After a parable or two in which He puts before them the Kingdom of Heaven for their immediate reception, and warns them of the consequences of refusal, He delivers that tremendous forecast of coming doom which must either be a shameless forgery or else stamps Him as one who knew more than it is given to mere men to know. And just at this point it is that commentators, old and new, English and German, have launched out into their wildest excesses of interpretation. By some it has been asserted that the account in St Luke refers to the destruction of Jerusalem, that in St Matthew to the end of the world, in utter forgetfulness that this is simply to play into the hands of the mythic school of interpreters.* By almost all (for what I myself know, it may be by all without exception) it is understood that the chief thing which occupied His mind was the destruction of the world, the fall of Jerusalem being a comparatively unimportant type of the great and distant * In using the word " commentators," it did not occur to me that it might be taken to include Mr Maurice. Need it be said that it is to him I owe the true doctrine of the Kingdom of Heaven? IO2 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. reality. Now I say that this is absolutely false. The true canons of interpretation are these : first, that every word must be applied first and fully (due allowance being made for metaphorical language mostly gathered from the pro- phets) to the fate -which the Jews were then bringing upon themselves, and, I also think, to the general break-up of the foundations of society by the destruction of the old "world," which He apprehended as inevitable; second, that any reference to future judgments can only be under- stood as being based upon general moral principles herein laid down, and is quite independent of outward details or of special times, such as a supposed end of the world. The prophecy is, in short, a description of all judgment in- directly, but directly only of the judgment of Jerusalem. Nothing can be more precise than the notes of time by which He appears to have endeavoured to guard their minds from exactly those errors into which men have since fallen. He begins with the declaration that not one stone of the Temple shall be left upon another. He speaks of the persecutions and false rumours that should assail the disciples. He bids them flee from Jerusalem, compassed about with armies. He tells them that they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, and gathering in His elect from the four quarters ; and lest this meta- phorical language, descriptive of the growth of the Church, should be misunderstood, He adds that then they shall know that it is near, even at the doors. Then He emphati- cally announces that this generation shall not pass before ALL these things be fulfilled : and if any man wishes to see what human sophistry, stimulated by a false tradition, can accomplish, let him read the attempts that have been made Christianity and Immortality. 103 to explain away these words. It is an instructive but mournful spectacle. After this, follow three prophetic parables, the Ten Vir- gins, the Talents, and the Sheep and the Goats, all turning upon the same point, but with one notable exception. The first describes his rejection or acceptance by the Jews as in- dividuals. The second explains His relations to His own ser- vants, that is, to all Christians, and prescribes their duties till His coming; though here, again, that. coming once more seems to recede into the distance, nor need we deny a possibly direct reference to a future world, the more so as a doctrine of rewards is laid down quite at variance with that of mere endless happiness, and suggestive of work, responsibility, and development. But in the third, the Master does, as it seems to me, in His closing words, practically abandon His standpoint in the present, and contemplate Himself as related to all mankind. I say this, not because the details of the parable would not equally well fall in with the other interpretation, but because the test by which He will try men at the eternal judgment is declared emphatically, not to be that of personal relationship to Himself, but of simple human kindness on the part of those who never heard His name. Humanity, itself, may take heart and rejoice, the strongest opponents of Christianity may cease to strive, when they remember that in His final words, when He was claiming to be the judge of mankind, He asserted that righteousness would be recognised as the work of human nature in kindness, love, and help, and that every man v/ho lived and laboured for his fellow-men would be found to have lived and laboured for Christ. It was thus, then, that Christ called men's attention 1 04 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. away from dreams of the future life to the present realities of their social, moral, and political condition ; but it must be pointed out that, in assigning to these the first place in His teaching, we are not limiting the scope of the parables, but very much enlarging it. They become morally true of all human life, delineations of man in all his many capaci- ties and relationships, all being ultimately referred to God. Heaven and hell, pardon and judgment, become very present and pressing realities, and religion is seen in the teaching of Christ to be throwing all her weight into the task of giving divine sanctions to the duties of the present world. The same applies to His teaching about the Resur- rection, and, as linked with it, judgment to come. The Pharisees believed in some sort of physical resurrection and future judgment. Our Lord, in the very beautiful discourse contained in St John,. ch.V., proclaimed that, as the Father raised the dead and quickened them, so the Son quickens whom He will, and that to Him all judgment has been committed. This He further explained by saying that all who believed in Him had already everlasting life ; and to show beyond all doubt that He was thinking of the present life, He added, "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live." And as though this were not enough, He used, a little further on, words which seem naturally to refer to the last final Resurrection as believed in by the Pharisees, to describe the present spiritual Resurrection and rapidly approaching judgment "The time is coming in which they that are in the graves shall hear His voice and shall come forth : they that have done good unto the Resurrec- tion of life, and they that have done evil unto the Resurrection Christianity and Immortality. 1 05 of condemnation." Once more, when Martha adopts the current Jewish notion concerning her brother, "I know that he shall rise again in the Resurrection at the last day," she receives the rebuking answer intended to show that the raising of Lazarus was typical of the immediate raising of humanity, "I am the Resurrection and the Life." So that we have here the fourth Gospel from its very different point of view bearing witness to the truth I am upholding, and we see from it as from the others that the Lord declared His desire to raise Judaism as it were from the dead, and foretold certain condemnation to all who would not hear His voice. And it is words like these that give to the actual Resurrection of Christ that moral power which St Paul afterwards saw so clearly and proclaimed so earnestly. To him it was the Resurrection of humanity, and of every human being that believed in Christ, from sin and darkness. The teaching of the apostles, indeed, bears evident traces of the difficulty they experienced in seeing clearly what was meant by Christ's coming in judgment, while their opinions seemed to have varied just as might be expected in the case of men who were living in the midst of the perplexities and agitations which that judg- ment caused, and whose very position prevented them from separating the outward and temporary circumstances from the abiding moral principles contained in His prophecy. However this may be, the fact, that the Resurrection was bound up first and chiefly with the rise of humanity from its past degradation, exercises a most important influence upon the value of the evidence by which the account of it is supported. For if it could be shown that the belief in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was connected in the io6 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. minds of the earliest Christian teachers with old Jewish opinions, or that it grew up in their minds almost uncon- sciously from the natural desire to give force and certainty to the longing for immortality, then the value of the evidence would be very seriously impaired. But when we see that it was attached to an entirely different set of moral conceptions, that it was welcomed rather as calling men to a life of practical goodness here, than as holding out to them the certainty of a life of endless happiness hereafter, we are obliged to admit that, except for the inevitable difficulty of believing in any thing supernatural, the history has everything to recommend it to favourable reception by candid minds. It may, however, be urged that we run some danger of cutting off the teaching and life of Christ from all reference to immortality whatsoever; but to this it may again be answered that, to adjust things into their proper places, it is often necessary to wrench them vigorously in the direction directly opposite to that in which they have been distorted. And I do not only maintain that the real application of the parables is to future life in this world, its judgments, rewards, and penalties, but I am also convinced that the sayings, in which the next world is expressly mentioned, bear witness, when examined, to Christ's desire not to fix men's attention upon the life to come to the prejudice of that which now is. Three of those exceptions, that prove the rule, occur to me now ; the first, His own voluntary teaching ; the last two, forced upon Him by circumstances. In the parable of Dives and Lazarus He uses common Jewish expressions to point out the danger of wealth and luxury, but He does so in such a manner as to make any pressing of the details in their literal mean- Christianity and Immortality. i o 7 ing a mere absurdity. The wildest imagination could hardly conceive this parable as meant to be a serious description of the actual future world. His answer to the Sadducees about the Resurrection was forced upon Him, and He contents Himself simply with clearing the doctrine from material and unworthy notions, asserting it as a fact, and proving the assertion from the words of God to Moses. The third instance is His promise to the dying thief, "To- day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise," where once more the necessity of consoling the penitent man obliges Him to give a promise of the world to come in words which the man himself and they that stood by could understand. Sad, indeed, is it to think what a superstructure of barren speculation has been raised by the prying spirit of human dogmatism upon these simple words, and how the language of metaphor, used simply for the purpose of being intel- ligible to those whom it chiefly concerned, has been per- verted into a literal statement of actual fact. But though I am sure that sayings of this kind are not to be taken for more than as affording a general indication of the existence of a life to come, yet it still remains to be pointed out that Christ did actually meet the cravings of the human soul for immortality. And this He did, not by making it the one main object of all His teaching, but by a single preg- nant saying and by a single suggestive act. Now let us ask at what time should we expect that Christ presented the idea of immortality plainly and de- cisively to the minds of His disciples. Any knowledge, however slight, of human nature and its necessities would teach us that the appropriate and, so to speak, moral occasion for this would be when the agony of approaching io8 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. separation made it necessary to find consolation both for Himself and them, and when a new spirit was breathed into the men upon whose love and faithfulness depended the future destinies of the Kingdom of Heaven. At the beginning, therefore, of His final discourse to the disciples we find a plain and direct reference to what we call Heaven, but which He carefully described under those simple personal and domestic terms which have made this saying especially dear to Christian minds:* "In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you : I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself, that where I am there ye may be also." Compare this sentence, in which the whole of Christ's direct teach- ing about immortality is contained, with the vast super- structure of the so-called Christian doctrine of the future state, and the striking contrast between the two will become apparent. How few, and yet how pregnant with all the thoughts that human nature requires for support and consolation, are the words of the Master ! How many and how fatal to human morality are the words of those who speak in His name ! The meaning and moral force, indeed, of what He taught in this saying it is not necessary to point out here ; it is sufficient to call attention to it as Christ's authentic description of the life to come. It em- braces all the beautiful or morally-useful associations which are attached to a house that shelters us, to the home where our Father dwells, to resting-places, to variety of interests * Even this passage has been thought to apply first to the Kingdom of God upon earth. But the words chosen are certainly such as to suggest strongly the idea of its future continuance in another world. Christianity and Immortality. 109 ("many"), to suitability of occupations ("prepared places"), to eternal communion with Christ himself. But more than this, though straitly questioned, He will not reveal: once more He turns their thoughts to the heavenly life upon earth, bidding them follow Him as the " Way," and to know the God whose house they were to inhabit here- after by knowing His Son now and here. Instead of dreams of the imagination, curious questionings of the intellect, selfish desires of the heart, dogmatic utterances of miscalled authority, He confined His teaching concern- ing the future world to that which can be safely gathered from the moral analogies of the present. And if Christians had taught immortality as Christ taught it, they would not have been compelled to witness the revolt of man's heart or mind from the assurance of the life to come. Still it may be said that a single sentence, standing almost alone, upon so vast a subject, affords but little ground whereon, to build the fabric of man's belief in immortality, so far as it is revealed in the teaching of Christ. But a moral power, greater than can be conveyed in words, is contained in the act of His to which I have alluded. I mean, of course, the Ascension ; for it is this that gives, as it were, external shape to what He said, and certainty to what He promised. But, to bring this out more clearly, we must trace the connection between re- ligion and science in working out the moral development of man. When the Jewish poets looked up into the heavens they found themselves alone with God, the universe, and their own souls. Not only would they abstain from worshipping the heavens, but they would, as it were, look them in the 1 10 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. face and consider them. And it seemed to them that they were the home of God, who had set His glory above them. Still, however, in the thought of the Jews, as of the Gentiles, in religion as in philosophy, the earth was the centre of the universe, and for its sake the heavens existed : it was that for which God had framed and designed everything else. So that the heavens, while testifying of God to the Jew, did not testify of immortality. He saw only that all men perish and come to an end. But with the change of our belief as to the true relations of heaven and earth, the idea of immortality first becomes practically and morally pos- sible. And this change we owe, first to the Ascension of Christ, to the simple fact that He had been seen to go up from earth heavenwards, which thus became the goal of man's hopes, the real centre of God's universe. But then man's ignorance of the real facts as to the physical relations between the earth and the heavens, prevented him for centuries from entering into the meaning of Christ's action, and gave occasion for the revival, or rather the continuance, of the old Pagan conceptions of heaven and hell. Coper- nicus was the best commentator on the Ascension, and the Ascension was a prophetic intimation of his discovery. A true religious idea was given as the necessary step to a true scientific one ; but the scientific idea, in turn, exploded all the errors which religion had built upon the original truth, that the earth is not the centre of the universe. In short, the ultimate end of this discovery is to banish the hope of selfish happiness, and substitute the idea of infinite variety, occupation, and progress, which the heavens, read in the light of modern science, now preach to us. They convey the same kind of impression as the earth itself must have Christianity and Immortality. 1 1 1 conveyed to the minds of those who believed it to be boundless space ; and we look up to the sky with much the same sort of feelings as men gazed across the Atlantic before Columbus crossed it. As the earth grows less the heavens grow more and more. Our scientific discoveries do not measure things as they are there ; our wisdom about man suggests much, but explains nothing as to the inhabitants of the worlds above. Now it is just at the time when the " earthly " sciences are making it difficult to conceive the idea of a spirit, separated from its natural bodily organisation, that the science of the heavens adds her emphatic testimony to the teaching of Christ, and to His action, more powerful than words, in ascending heavenwards. There is a place, or rather there are places, where men may live after death so says science. There is a Man who has gone there so says religion. The law of progress will not consent to be bound down within earthly limits ; when it has accom- plished everything upon earth it sighs for new worlds to conquer. So that the truest conception of immortality is precisely that with which we are becoming more and more familiar; that which on the physical side we may call evolution, on the moral side, education. To take the commonest instance, the soul of a thoughtful man, looking into futurity, resembles the soul of a thoughtful child just standing on the verge of this world's life. There are dreams of work, of honours, of friendships, and of success. Both are leaving school and beginning the larger life into which they will carry the character already formed, the prepara- tion already made. The man is as sure that there is a world of work and of life beyond this as the boy who hears 1 1 2 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. and sees traces of the various callings and occupations of the world in which grown men act and move. Here, after the discipline of life is over, will be his future abiding and working place. Here, in one of the unnumbered worlds of God, may he carry onwards and upwards the life of an immortal being. From the two propositions which I have thus endeavoured to substantiate first, that Christ's direct teaching concerned almost exclusively the present world ; second, that His teaching about the world to come represents it simply as the development of our moral qualities and spiritual life under higher conditions there follow two conclusions, to which I invite the serious attention of all who desire to see truths harmonised with each other instead of being set in endless contradiction. The first is, that the objections urged by modern thought against Christian morality do not apply to the teaching of Christ himself; the second is, that this teaching, so far from being opposed to the spirit of modern science, is in exact accordance with it. We are familiar with the objections to which I refer. Religious men, it is said, are diverted from the duties of this world, from realising the sacredness of humanity, from seeing the necessity of immediate reforms and improvements, from sympathy with national and social life, owing to the too- present and absorbing contemplation of the life to come. No one, I suppose, really believes that this is practically the case to any considerable extent, at any rate at the pre- sent time; but it is contended that this escape is due simply to the fact that human nature is strong enough to triumph in the long run over the perversions of religious truth. But the objection, as an objection against Chris- Christianity and Immortality. 1 1 3 tianity, vanishes, if once it can be shown that the mind of Christ was full of the present evils and pressing wants that afflicted His countrymen ; that His moral teaching was meant above all things to throw light upon human life and human nature under their present conditions ; that to do our duty here, to look for judgment now, to set up righteousness and justice in the world we live in, to be citizens, patriots, masters, and servants in that larger and deeper sense which He saw and proclaimed, is the true Kingdom of Heaven which He died to establish. All this shines forth in the parables the moment they are removed from the false, unnatural glare which the almost exclusive notion of a Heaven to come has cast upon them. But I confess that even this reconciliation, important as it is, does not satisfy my ambition. I believe that the truth I am here insisting upon is the missing link needed to bind together the morality of Paganism and Christianity. Whether Christian morality is or is not perfect, whether there is in it, not only something wanting, but even a certain one-sided, perverting influence, has been, and still is, the subject of a long and unsatisfactory controversy. On the one hand it is seen that there are certain moral truths which Christianity does not teach, and certain factors in human nature of which it seems to take no account ; on the other hand, to lay this at the door of Jesus Christ, or even of St Paul, appears manifestly un- reasonable. The object of the life of Christ was to add to humanity those last and highest ideas which complete man's conceptions of duty and of character, not to go over ground already traversed. In a single word, His object H .114 Reconciliation of Religion and Science. and mission were purely religious. He is the Head of humanity, but not the whole of it ; He does not supersede what is true in other teachers, but gives motive power and divine perfection to what they have already taught. There is nothing exclusive about Him, when we understand His mission aright, any more than there is about the call of the Jewish nation, when once we have realised that they were not the only nation pleasing to God, or exclusively occupied in accomplishing His will. The objection, however, that Christ's teaching is not only negative on some points (which in truth it could hardly fail to be, if it were to be human at all), but that.it is absolutely one-sided, requires a different answer, and cannot be said to be unreasonable when we remember the absolutely pernicious effects which have, according to the testimony of history, flowed from that which has authoritatively claimed to represent it. The problem is this : There are certain faulty results arising from Christian morality, and yet it is not fair to charge them upon Christ's teaching unless it contained something positively untrue, or upon His character unless He plainly did something wrong. If so, then, where do they come from ? Now the answer is, that perversions creep into the moral teaching of any man when the end which he himself has in view is altered, and the facts to which his teaching was adapted are wrongly stated. View, for instance, the character and teaching of Christ through the atmosphere created by the ever-present consciousness of a future endless heaven to be obtained, and a future endless hell to be avoided^ and then every evil effect which can, with any truth, be traced to Christiarj influences is '-Z^-* v*.r, > f. /