* WU bien ee Z tie Yj Ege af the Gheolagicny Ss; Mina yond 27 PRINCETON, N. J. ay eet See 0 te + PY cco . oe a THE WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE WITH REFERENCE TO SCEPTICAL OBJECTIONS BY J H’ McILVAINE THIS ANCIENT AND VENERABLE RECORD CONTAINS THE PROFOUNDEST AND LOFTIEST WISDOM AND PRESENTS THOSE RESULTS TO WHICH ALL PHILOSOPHY MUST AT LAST RETURN FICHTE NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS 1885 CoPpyRIGHT BY CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS 1883 PHILADELPHIA GRANT, FAIRES & RODGERS Yi weeswyere * CONTENTS Tryp CREATION OF THE WORLD .....i-+ se eeceeeceee ak eR ATCT COSMO ONT Econ he ene ee ete 6 Bae eth PORT ATIONT OR: MAN corsets icc d pce en ap ain wee, ters V0) esis 55 IV THE DUPLEX NATURE OF MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD .... 87 NV THE TEMPTATION IN THE GARDEN OF EDEN. .....+...- 99 VI EL TAIN ATc SEN OMe tease eee bie ea aad eo ee Se gx ee ba hee RUUD EN OPEL ed a er na ena gh te ae ce ell ae Chie oe acral Tk Lk | VIII Puss Bod Wars Re OE 9 RNG Oe ar Rh eee ee a nk ae ce ee Ree IX Trae) JUDGMENT. UPON® WOMAN.« gp aad syieek ahs ego Paeuayy «wane Oe eT re Mrsenrre TIN MA Mae id Ge om eee in cds ac ees wet AOG iV THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS CONTENTS XI XII THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE. THE HoLty SABBATH . THE INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY . POPULATION $5325 .-< THE MORAL DIFFICULTIES OF THE PARAMOUNT CHARACTER CREEDS AND CONFESSIONS RELIGION AND POLITICS . XVII OF THE LORD’S TEACHING x VITE XIII XIV Ge XVI THE OLD TESTAMENT. 182 208 236 300 409 447 THE WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE WITH REFERENCE TO SCEPTICAL OBJECTIONS > < Caer tp igen THE WISDOM OF EL On Vis OEP UL A THE CREATION OF THE WORLD In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. THE account of the creation in the first chapter of the Bible has always been greatly admired for its sublimity and beauty. The sentence with which it commences, “ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” is a grand rhetorical synthesis which brings the whole sub- ject under a single view of the mind, and the subsequent analysis unrolls the vast picture in a succession of the most vivid and animated scenes. Hence we find that even a heathen rhetorician and philosopher, the amiable and accomplished Longinus, could not withhold from it his meed of glowing praise; for in his celebrated treatise on The Sublime he speaks of it in comparison with the beau- ties of Homer as follows: “So also the Jewish lawgiver, who was no common man, exhibits the power of the Deity in a manner worthy of its excellency: God said—what does He say? ‘Let there be light,’ and it was: ‘Let the earth be,’ and it was.” In fact, the sublimity of this representa- tion of the power of God, in that He created all things. by a word, is probably unrivalled in the literature of the world. 1 2 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE The expression, “In the beginning,” carries the mind back through all the dim ages of the past in order to portray to the imagination the genesis or origin of all created things. Its indefiniteness is eminently suitable to the subject. Jor here there is no attempt to determine chronologically when the creation took place ; nor, indeed, is there in the subsequent Scriptures any information from which it is possible to form a satisfactory estimate of the age of the world. We have no science of chronology re- vealed from heaven, any more than of other things which are the legitimate subjects of scientific investigation. There is no reason to think that the apostles or writers of the New Testament regarded the Scriptures as containing an inspired chronology. For they quote from the Septuagint trans- lation as freely as from the original, notwithstanding this version of the Old Testament would give for the age of the world nearly fifteen hundred years more than can be gathered from the Hebrew text. ‘They do not even notice this, nor similar discrepancies, which seems to warrant the inference that they did not regard them as of any practical importance. Jt is true, indeed, that learned men have taken the greatest pains to work up a sacred chronology from the data supplied in the Holy Scriptures. But no two of them agree in their results, so that they are of no author- ity. Nor can this be a matter of surprise to any one who will take the trouble to examine for himself the materials out of which these elaborate systems are constructed ; for he will find them to be nothing else but the genealogies interspersed here and there in the historical records, which a child may see were never intended and are totally un- trustworthy for any such purpose. For they freely apply the terms, father and son, to grandfathers and grandsons, and even to remote ancestors and descendants; and they leave out, or skip over two, three, and sometimes as many as thirty or forty generations at atime. Thus in the first THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 24 words of St. Matthew’s Gospel “The book of the genera- tion of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abra- ham,” there are thirty-eight or forty generations omitted, links in the chain which are elsewhere supplied, and how many more we have no means of determining. Now, if this statement stood alone, it would appear that Christ was the son and not a remote descendant of David, and so of David with respect to Abraham. Hence, it would seem that the attempt to construct a chronology out of such materials is preposterous; and that great and good men should have wasted so much labor, learning and ingenuity in building up these imaginary schemes is one of those things which must be classed with the many attempts which have been made, and which have not yet ceased, to discover or invent a perpetual motion. The Holy Scrip- tures leave science perfectly free within her own sphere, as in all other things, so in this, to determine by her own methods, if she can, the age of the world and the length of time during which it has been inhabited by man. They teach nothing opposed to any conclusions upon these and similar questions which may be established on scientific evidence. If it should thus be proved that the earth is millions of years old, and that it has been inhabited by man for a much longer time than has commonly been sup- posed, we may accept these results without the least detri- ment to our faith and with entire satisfaction. The stupendous theme here presented to our contempla- tion is the creation of the universe by the power of God at some unknown time in the ages of the past. The being or existence of God is boldly assumed, without attempting to prove or account for it in any way; and in this respect there is a striking contrast between the Christian Scriptures and other ancient books which pretend to Divine inspira- tion. For in these counterfeits of the true coin we often find the most labored attempts to trace the genealogies of the gods, which are always absurd, inasmuch as it is mani- 4 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE festly impossible to conceive of an origin for that from which all other things originated. We cannot even make an effort to form such a conception without involving our- selves in the labyrinths of an infinite series, in which there is always something beyond what we can reach with our minds, and of whose existence no rational account can be . given. Instead of leading us into the mazes of this in- extricable perplexity, the sacred writers begin with God in the exercise of all His personal and creative attributes, and simply refer to the creation of the world as being in it- self such evidence of His eternal power and Godhead that none but the fool can say in his heart, there is no God. And the reasonableness of this assumption can be denied by none but atheists, who are shut up to one or the other of the following alternatives, namely, either that the world has always existed, or that it came into being of itself. Now, that it has always existed and is eternal, is certainly a possible conception, yet it is one which has been constantly rejected by the masses of mankind and by the greatest minds and noblest characters the world has ever seen. With these we joyfully cast in our lot, without un- dertaking further to refute this form of atheism. But the other alternative, that the universe came into being of itself, is not a possible conception, however it may be re- garded as such by minds incapable of profound and rigor- ous thought. For it is a first and necessary. truth that whatever begins to be must be produced by some cause adequate and exterior to itself. All science rests on this truth as its foundation and chief corner-stone; without it there can be no such thing as science or knowledge. But after all, it is probable that nothing better can be said on this abstruse subject than what has been said by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews: “ Through faith we under- stand that the worlds were framed, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” Now this stupendous exercise of the power of God must THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 5) be conceived of as truly and properly of a miraculous char- acter, which affords us a favorable opportunity here to examine this primary fact of creation in its bearing upon the vexed question of the probability of miracles in the subsequent history of the world. We propose, therefore, in what follows to contemplate the subject of miracles from the point of view of the primal miracle of the creation of the universe. This we shall find to be high vantage- ground ; for scepticism or faith with respect to such abnor- mal manifestations of Divine power turns very much upon our stand-point. Considering only the absolute unitormity of physical laws, we must regard miracles as altogether improbable, and the burden of their proof as resting on their defenders. But standing where we are placed at the opening of God’s revelation to man, on this first and greatest of all miracles, we shall see that the antecedent probability is in favor of their subsequent occurrence, and that the burden of proof consequently rests on those who maintain that they have never occurred. For miracles must be ex- pected in the subsequent history of a world, or system of things, which originated in a miracle. In the first place, then, that the creation of the world was a miracle in the only true and proper sense of the word becomes evident as soon as we have formed a clear and right conception of what a miracle is, such as is contained in the following definition : A miracle is an act or work of God in the external world which cannot be compre- hended under the law of uniformity in physical causation, and to which the power of created beings is inadequate. But in referring such manifestations to the power of God exclusively we neither affirm nor deny that inferior and even wicked spirits may produce results having all the ap- pearance of miracles, for our present purpose does not re- quire the discussion of this curious question. A miracle as here defined can be wrought by none other but the power of God acting in a manner extraneous to the laws of nature. 6 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE Yet does it in no wise imply their abolition, violation, or suspension for one moment. yen in the raising of the dead to life, the laws of gravitation, chemical, capillary and electrical attraction and repulsion, polarity of light, correlation and conservation of forces, together with all other physical laws which have ever been discovered or named, retain their uniformity, and remain absolutely un- affected. Let any one who speaks of a miracle as a viola- tion or suspension of nature’s laws be required to name the particular law which is supposed to be thus affected, and he will immediately see that no such thing is implied in the greatest miracle that was ever wrought. Buta true miracie cannot be ranged under any physical law, nor ascribed to any physical cause, whether light, heat, electricity, chemical attraction, or any other of the forces which operate uniformly in nature. Any fact which may have been called miraculous, if it be attributed to any of these, or if it be supposed that it may hereafter be accounted for by some as yet undiscovered physical force or law, ceases thereby to be regarded as a miracle. Hence it is obvious that the proper distinction between miracles and natural phenomena does not turn upon the conception of a different power or cause in the two cases. The ultimate cause which produces them is here conceived of as the same in both. Its mode of operation only is dif- ferent, being uniform in the one, and non-uniform or ab- normal in the other. For the forces of nature are simply the uniform action or energy of the power or will of God, and all physical phenomena are the results of His immediate and voluntary agency. But this conception requires to be elucidated and verified. Either, then, the forces of nature are the energy of the Divine will, or they are the acts of inferior spirits, or they are the properties of matter, or they are entities in them- selves. For no other conception of them ever has been, or ever can be formed ; nor, indeed, are all those possible con- THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 6 ceptions. or as entities in themselves they are absolutely inconceivable, notwithstanding many scientists are accus- tomed to speak of “matter and force” as if these were in- dependent and co-ordinate existences. It is impossible to form a conception of force otherwise than as the act or property of some being or substance from which it pro- ceeds, In some such being, therefore, the forces of nature must inhere. As the properties of matter they are con- ceivable, but that this is not the true conception of them may be evinced by many considerations, especially by this, that it is inconsistent with the property of inertia, or essen- tial passivity of matter, upon which all astronomical and other physical science depends. For if a body cannot move itself, how can it by its own power move other bodies ? Hence it was maintained by Sir Isaac Newton that the at- traction of gravitation, so called, could not be a property of matter, but must be conceived of as a force acting from without upon matter. Moreover, our original conception of that which we call force is derived solely, as all agree, from the consciousness of our own voluntary acts in mov- ing our hands, feet, or other members of our bodies. But for this consciousness of our own voluntary causality we could know nothing whatever of force or causation, and in all the on-goings of the universe we should see nothing but precedence and sequence, or the bare succession of phe- nomena. Hence this conception of force, so obtained, can- not legitimately be extended to anything which is incapable of volition, for such an extension takes it out of the sphere in which alone we can know that there is any such thing. There is no evidence whatever that original causality can be exerted by any but voluntary beings : in other words, all force is will-power. Hence it becomes necessary to ascribe the forces of nature to spiritual agency, either to that of God himself, or to that of created spirits, angels or demons. This latter view with respect to angels or demons was held by Proclus and the eclectic philosophers of an- 8 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE cient times, perhaps also by their great master, Plato him- self, and it is favorably regarded by some eminent modern theologians, But it seems to be extremely fanciful, and altogether inconsistent with the precision and absolute uni- formity, but above all, with the unity and infinite power which these forces everywhere manifest. The only possible conception of them which remains is, that they are the uni- form action or energy of the Divine will ; and this view is held and strenuously maintained by many eminent physicists of modern times. We shall see in the sequel that it is alto- gether Scriptural. Now with this conception of physical force it appears that the phenomena of light, heat, electricity, gravitation, and the like, the germination and growth of plants and animal bodies—in a word, all the productions of nature, differ from miracles, not at all in the power which pro- duces them, but simply and solely in that they are compre- hended under the law of uniformity in causation. For every such phenomenon there is an antecedent uniform cause, which is always the same for the same effect. Thus gravitation is the one such cause for the falling of a body to the earth wherever it occurs. Hence there is absolute uniformity in all the operations of nature—this is their specific character. In fact, the only true and proper mean- ing of the word nature is that in which it designates uni- formity in the phenomena of the world. Here, also, we have a criterion of distinction between true and false or pretended miracles. For these latter are phenomena which in reality are produced by uniform or physical causation, but which men ascribe to non-uniform or spiritual agency, either because they themselves are de- ceived, or because they seek to impose upon others. For whenever anything occurs of which the true cause is unknown, it may be ascribed to some occult physical force, or it may be regarded as a miracle. The former is charac- teristic of science, the latter of superstition. The Scriptu- THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 9 ralview is the golden mean between these two extremes; namely, that there are such things as miracles, but that nothing is to be received as such except phenomena for which natural causes are undiscoverable and rationally in- conceivable. These views may be still further illustrated and con- firmed by considering the historical relations between science and superstition. or it is the specific function of science to account for and explain the phenomena of nature by ranging them under the laws of uniform causation; superstition, on the other hand, consists in ascribing them to spiritual agency. Consequently and in fact, wherever superstition has prevailed, science has been feeble; and as science has made progress, superstition has declined. Hence, in the earliest ages, the people were, and wherever the light of science has not penetrated they still are, under the dominion of gloomy and cruel superstitions. The negro population of the west coast of Africa are said to be diminishing in numbers from the enormous destruction of human life, which is constantly going on by the poison- ordeal for the detection of witchcraft. For this form of superstition seems to be the only religion of the people, and every case of natural sickness and death is attributed to supernatural agency. Even among the ancient Israel- ites, with all their light of Divine revelation, the wor- ship of the golden calf was with difficulty suppressed, and was subsequently restored by Jeroboam, “who made Israel to sin;” whilst “ Moloch, horrid king,’ to whom they offered up their infant children, continued to be wor- shipped down to a late period in their history. These and other similar abominations of superstition long re- mained among them, all resting on false miracles. Among the Greeks and other pagan peoples, in the earlier stages of their history, almost every natural phenomenon was as- cribed to supernatural agency—was regarded as a miracle. Hence that rabble of false gods which were the objects of 1* 10 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE their superstitious worship—gods of the earth, air and ocean—gods of the sun, moon and stars—gods of the day and of the night—a god for every season, stream and tree, and for every passion of the human heart. But when science began to make progress among them, when the uni- form causes of natural phenomena began to be discovered, the gods retired, either into the secret recesses of the tem- ples, or to the summits of the highest mountains. If, then, you would find one you must go to Delphi or to some other sacred fane, or you must ascend the steeps of Mount Olympus or Mount Ida. And when it was dis- covered that uniform causes, the same as in the populous plains and along the fertile banks of the rivers and streams, were in full operation on the mountain tops, the gods took flight to the skies, and dwelt in their golden palaces above the firmament. Even there they were not allowed to rest, but were warred upon by the earth-born Titans. In this final conflict, however, these enemies were overthrown and made to pay the penalty of their crimes. Such earth-born Titans are the great materialists of modern science, who would banish the Creator from the world He has created and upholds by the word of His power, and who. may read their doom in this old heathen prophecy. Notwithstanding, we can well afford to be patient with these painful negations into which foolish scientists are be- trayed by their excess of zeal for uniformity, especially when we consider the inestimable benefits of science in every department of human life, but most of all, what- ever foolish theologians may think, in religion. For true religion and true science are twin-sisters, both from God, though in different ways; both grand sources of human well-being; and their reciprocal influence is such that neither can do without the other. For, on the one hand, the intellectual faculties of man are rooted, so to speak, in his moral and spiritual nature, by means of which they draw their richest and only adequate nourishment from THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 11 the infinite of truth; and it is only thus, in distinction from those of mere animals, that they are rendered capable of growth and development from generation to generation, and from age to age. All science, properly so called, erasps with the intellect the raw material of truth, and subjects it to the forms and laws of thought. It is truly and properly a blossom and fruit of faith, nor can it ever attain to its utmost and permanent development except upon the soil of religion. On the other hand, scientific culture is the most powerful and effective means of de- veloping and purifying the intellect, so that it becomes capable of appreciating the evidences and blessings of true religion, in distinction from baleful superstitions. This, doubtless, is the reason why Christianity, with its tran- scendentclaims upon the faith of mankind, always prevails wherever science is cultivated, and why there is not even a possibility of any other religion in the bosom of modern civilization. The benign influence of science upon religion, however, is most conspicuous, as has been indicated, in that it emancipates the human mind from the paralyzing terrors and hideous cruelties of superstition. For unenlightened faith does not teach men to discriminate between true and false miracles; nor, in any other respect, between true and false religions. Consequently it cannot effectually guard mankind against, nay, it betrays them and leaves them a prey to superstition. Tor, inasmuch as it mightily stimu- lates the imagination, it predisposes the mind to accept as miraculous facts or phenomena which can be otherwise comprehended and explained. ‘There is abundant evidence on this point in the idolatries of the ancient Tsraelites, in the superstitions of medizeval and modern Romanism, and in those which still remain in the bosom of the Protestant church. The overthrow of superstition is to be ascribed chiefly to the influence of science, stimulated, quickened and developed by the universal diffusion of the Holy Scrip- 12 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE tures ; and this result is accomplished by its discoveries of physical causes for those phenomena which otherwise are sure to be regarded as miraculous. Having thus defined and elucidated the nature of a miracle as an act or work of God which is not in uniform- ity with the course of nature, we easily see that the creation of the world was truly and properly a miraculous exercise of Divine power. For “in the beginning” there was no pre-existing course of nature in uniformity with which the creation could stand; consequently there was no _ pbysical cause in operation by which it can be explained. Ié we admit that the world was created, the supposition of any such physical cause involves a palpable contradic- tion, because it assumes that nature, which is the system of uniform causation, existed before it began to exist. Nor does it matter how far back in time this creative work of God may be placed, whether six thousand or six mil- lions of years ago, nor how different that which was originally created may have been from what the world is now. It may even be conceded here, what on mere scien- tific evidence can be strenuously denied, that all existing things have been evolved, by uninterrupted uniform causa- tion, from the elemental star-dust of the astronomers, yet that star-dust, if it was the first thing created, must have originated without a physical cause, that is to say, by a miraculous act of the Creator. If then, we admit that there ever was any creation at all, if matter be not eternal, although no other miracle had ever occurred in the ,history of the world, yet here in its origin we have one at least, and one that covers a ereat deal of ground. And this miraculous origin of the world pours a flood of light upon the question, whether the occurrence of miracles in its subsequent history is, or is not, a credible and probable thing. In fact, it raises a strong presumption against absolute uniformity in the operations of Divine power, and in favor of a very differ- THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 13 ent procedure. For since, as in this case, God has once acted in a manner not in uniformity with anything in the past, such exercise of His power is thereby established as one of the modes in which it is competent for Him to act; since He has wrought one miracle He may have seen it equally wise and good to work others; and since that one miracle was the creation of the world, it is reasonable to expect that subsequent development and history will par- take, in some degree at least, of the miraculous character of their origin. Thus we see that the antecedent proba- bility, or presumption, is not against miracles, as is com- monly supposed, but strongly in their favor. But in order to estimate this presumption at anything like its full value, it is necessary to take into consideration here the old and well-known truth, that the natures of things are in their beginnings. The peculiar nature of the oak is in the acorn, and so of all other plants after their kinds. The nature of the lion is in the lion’s cub, and so of all other species of animals. The nature of man was in the first man, and so of all other created beings. More- over, the peculiar natures of things often stand out unveiled more conspicuously in their origin than in any subsequent stage of their development or history. We have a beautiful example of this in the young of some domesticated animals, which bear the precise and uniform marks of their former wild state, although these marks have long ago disappeared from their ancestors under the modifying influences of domestication. This principle, that the natures of things are most conspicuous in their beginnings, has been applied in science with magnificent results. Hence that flood of light which the Jamented Agassiz, by his studies in embry- ology, poured upon the physical constitution of man, upon the whole subject of natural history, and, it may be added, upon the fundamental truths of religion. For his work on Classification is incomparably the greatest argument » in natural theology the world has ever seen. Paley, in 14 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE comparison, 1s as the watch which one carries in his pocket to the world of living creatures. The principle holds equally good in all historical develop- ments. With what admirable insight St. Paul, in his discourse to the Athenians in the hall of the Areopagus, characterizes Greek idolatry by the germinal principle in which it originated, and in the development and realization of which its life consisted, namely, that the gods were like men, and therefore could be worthily represented and worshipped under human forms and images of gold and silver and stone “graven by art and man’s device!” ‘Thus, also, the idea that might makes right is one upon which heathen Rome was founded, in consequence of which it dominated through all her vast history, from the rape of the Sabine virgins to her final conquest and plunder of the world. In like manner, the history of the Jews—what is it to this hour but the realization of the covenant made with Abraham, in which it had its mysterious origin? And what is the history of Protestantism but that of the progressive realization of those ideas of individual liberty and personal responsibility in which it originated? Nor is it possible to comprehend the history of the American republic apart from the ideas, purposes, aspirations and character of those refugees from civil and religious oppres- sion who first landed on our shores and founded our institutions. Now this truth, that the beginnings of things contain and manifest their true natures, of which their whole his- tory is the development and realization, applies with all its significance to the creation and subsequent history of the world, For since the world originated in a stupendous miracle, the miraculous exercise of Divine power must be conceived of as entering into its constitution, as required for its conservation, and as certain to be manifested in its history. Would it not be a strange and incomprehensible thing if its most essential and striking characteristic in its THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 15 origin should from that moment and forever disappear ? Is it reasonable to suppose that, owing its very existence to a miracle, it would never in the whole course of its subse- quent history manifest anything of a miraculous nature? We might as well say that although the nature of the oak is in the acorn, yet the nature of the acorn is not in the oak. Jewish history originated in the covenant with Abraham, but the principle of that transaction must not be expected ever again to manifest itself in the life of the Jewish people. Greek idolatry sprang from the belief that the gods were like men, but it must not be anticipated that it will ever produce a statue of any god in a human form. Protestantism originated in the principle of indi- vidual liberty and responsibility, but it is against all probability that there should ever be another manifestation of this principle in Protestant history. Such is the pre- posterous assumption of those who admit a primal creation, and yet maintain that the occurrence of miracles in the subsequent history. of the world is against all probability, and incapable of being substantiated without such an array of evidence as is required for no other class of facts. But it may be objected to this argument that it proves too much, namely, that the whole history of the world should partake of a miraculous character. For since the principle in which Protestantism originated reappears at every step of its progress, the miraculous exercise of Di- vine power which gave birth to the universe ought, not occasionally, but constantly to manifest itself. Now this is a perfectly fair objection, and requires to be as fairly met. The solution of the difficulty, however, is not far to seek, for we shall find it in the conception of miracle which has been defined, together with a further confirma- tion of this definition. For the definition of a miracle which has been given includes, along with others, these two distinct and separable elements, namely, (1) an act of God, and (2) such an ex- 16 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ertion of His power as cannot be comprehended under the law of uniformity in physical causation. Now, if the whole agency of God in nature had been of a non-uniform character, it is evident, since all the physical forces are the energy of His power, that there could have been no such thing as law or order in the universe. Consequently science, which, properly defined, is the knowledge of laws, would have been impossible. Neither could there have been any rational creatures; for reason in man involves the recognition of uniformity in such laws as that fire will burn, and water will drown; that food nourishes, and poison kills. It is insanity to think that there is no such uniformity: nor can it be doubted but that, if the uniform laws which now govern the forces and phenomena of na- ture should be set aside, universal insanity in mankind would immediately ensue. Moreover, without such uni- formity the creation itself could never have passed beyond the first stage of chaos, if it could have attained even to that; for law and order are its fundamental ideas as a cosmos, apart from which it could never have existed. In fine, it is an inconceivable thing that the whole agency of God in nature should be of a non-uniform character ; for if it had been such, this would have been the uniform mode of His operations. The supposition, therefore, is self-contradictory and absurd. Thus we see that there were the best of reasons why the universe was made sub- ject to law, why a departure from uniformity in all its phenomena was impossible, and why this element of mira- cle must necessarily; be of comparatively rare occurrence. But, with respect to the other element of miracle, the energy or action of the Divine power, the case is altogether different; for this is always and everywhere present throughout the universe. One form of its manifestation is in the sustentation of created things. For God did not only create, but ‘He upholds all things by the word of His power, and by Him all things consist.’ The continuance THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 17 in existence of that which He has created depends upon the direct and immediate action of His will as truly as did the creation itself. But for this the universe would instantly cease and become as if it had never been. This rock- ribbed earth with all its marble bones, however solid and indestructible it may seem, would lose its solidity; it would melt and dissolve as a vapor, and not even a vapor would be left. This glorious arch of the heavens, this “firmament,” whose name in all languages is significant of its immovable stability, would immediately disappear. What stability in these laws of nature, by which the plan- ets revolve in their prescribed orbits, by which the sun rises and sets in bis appointed times, by which the earth brings forth her productions in their proper seasons ! What conservation of all the forces of nature, so that, in the multiform changes which are constantly taking place, not one particle of them is ever expended or lost! Yet, if God should cease for one moment to exert His energy in nature, that moment all this would cease to be. And this subtle, impalpable essence in man, his mind, soul, spirit, by which he thinks, feels and acts, is no less dependent upon uninterrupted sustentation by the will and power of God than is his physical organism. | But the presence and energy of Divine power in nature is not limited to sustentation. For inasmuch as the physi- cal forces which act upon matter and produce most of its phenomena are the uniform action of the will of God, He is the doer of whatsoever is done by them as truly and. immediately as in miracles themselves. God is the im- mediate source of all working power in and throughout the physical universe. The laws of nature are nothing but the uniform modes or methods according to which, for good and sufficient reasons, He chooses to work. ‘These laws are never to be confounded with the forces of which they are simply the modes of operation; nor are these forces to be identified with the properties of matter, the 18 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE chief of which is inertia or passivity. The conception of nature as a vast and complex machine, having its powers in itself as the properties of matter, or otherwise, which God created a great while ago, and which He now stands by, or afar off, to watch and direct, as an engineer super- intends the machinery of a factory, would, if it were ex- haustively analyzed, be found as self-contradictory as that of a perpetual motion. But the moral consequences of its prevalence are those which are most to be deplored. For if the machine be a perfect one, as surely the work of in- finite wisdom and power ought to be, what need or place is there for God even as an engineer? ‘Thus by this con- ception the Creator is banished from His own works. The omnipotent and ever-active God of the Scriptures becomes little more than the deity of the ancient Epicureans, with- drawn into some remote corner of infinite space, too far off to concern himself with our petty interests or welfare— a god of eternal idleness. Indeed, if He were ever so much concerned for our well-being and happiness, what, according to this conception of Him, could He do for us, even in our utmost need, subject as we are to the fatal forces of nature, with whose operations He has nothing whatever to do? Such views of God and nature render “the faith of prayer and all expectation of help from Him impossible and absurd. It is a doctrine of despair. The sacred writers know nothing of nature as a system of matter and force, nor of forces inherent in matter. They everywhere represent natural phenomena as immediately caused by the power or will of God. In these days there has been a wide departure, even among Christians and the- ologians, from the forms of expression in which His omni- present agency is revealed and emphasized. For where we are accustomed to say, it thunders, it lightens, it rains, it storms, and the like, in the word of God it is: “ The fire of God...God thundereth marvellously with His voice. He commandeth and raiseth up the stormy wind... He THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 19 maketh the storm a calm, so that the waves thereof be still... He sendeth the springs into valleys... He wa- tereth the hills... He giveth rain upon the earth... These wait all upon thee that thou mayest give them their meat in due season... Thou sendest forth thy breath —they are created. Thou openest thy hand—they are filled with good. Thou takest away their breath—they die and return to their dust... Behold the fowls of the air ... your heavenly Father feedeth them... Consider the lilies of the field ....Solomon in all his glory was not ar- rayed like one of these... If God so clothe the grass of the field... how much more shall he clothe you?... Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing ?...and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.” Such is ever the Scriptural representation of nature, namely, as the power or will of God working according to those methods which are properly called physical laws. He, therefore, moves the planets, according to the method or law of gravitation, through their vast elliptical orbits around their focal suns. He shines in the light, and quickens the earth with His genial influences. He sprouts the germ in the ground, and draws up the juices of the earth through its capillary tubes, and nourishes there- with the growing plant. He stretches out its branches, puts forth its leaves, blooms its flowers, paints their petals with His own varied and beautiful colors, and forms and ripens its delicious fruit. The lightning is the flash of His eye, the thunder is His voice, now as of old. He speaks in the roar of the cataract, the storm, and the troubled ocean as truly (though in a different manner) as He spoke from the midst of the cloud and flame on the summit of Mount Sinai to the many thousands of Israel. In the motions of the planetary worlds, in the blooming of the flowers, in the growing and ripening of the corn, in the fall of the sparrow, in the birth of an infant, His direct and immediate agency is manifested as truly (though in a different man- 20 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ner) as it was in the creation of the world and in the raising of Lazarus from the dead. All this He does now by His free choice and voluntary action, though ina uniform man- ner, no less than He so acted when he created the universe. For within, under, behind — or howsoever it may be ex- pressed—all the methods, processes, forces and laws of nature is ever the omnipresent action or energy of the one only living and true God. And not only in the phenomena of nature, strictly so . called, is this ubiquitous action of the Divine power, but also in the sustentation and government of his rational and voluntary creatures, even in the fullest exercise of their own freedom and responsibility. For although man’s acts are his own, and in no such sense the acts of God as that thereby his responsibility can be impaired, yet is he not, even in the freest exercise of his faculties, independent of God, but is ever subject to His influence and under His control : “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, and as the rivers of water He turneth it whithersoever He will. ... Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee, and the re- mainder of wrath shalt thou restrain.” Thus it is that by His sovereign control and direction of man’s faculties God is in all human history working out His wise and holy and benign purposes, no less, (though in a different manner) than in the world of nature, or the sphere of physical forces and their laws. In fine, the direct and immediate agency of God by His Holy Spirit is manifested in the regenera- tion and sanctification of human souls, and in all the phe- nomena of spiritual life, in such wise that this whole work would have to be regarded as miraculous in the full sense of the word, if it were not that in it the human is Insepara- bly blended with the Divine, and that it partakes of some- thing approaching to uniformity. Now, with these Scriptural views of the Divine agency in nature and in man—views which are held by many and an ever-increasing number of distinguished physicists at THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 1: the present time—we see that one element of miracle, namely, the energy of God, is in full manifestation every- where in the universe and throughout its whole history. The other element, that is, departure from uniformity, was not possible nor conceivable, except in rare cases. Hence the objection that, if the true nature and constitution of the world be represented in the miracle of its creation, its whole history ought to be miraculous, is not valid; whilst, at the same time, it is found to embody one of the most important of all truths, and one which confirms instead of invalidating the presumption that miracles in the full sense of the word would occur, whereby a still heavier burden of proof is laid upon those who maintain that never since the creation has there been any such manifesta- tion of Divine power. Moreover, the counter-presumption of absolute uniformity upon which over-zealous and one-sided scientists lay so much stress, is wholly gratuitous, and no less inconsistent with the most exalted and perfect ideas which we can form of the Divine Being. For there is not a shadow of proof that by such uniformity the best possible results in the government and history of the world could be attained. God, in the ex- ercise of His infinite wisdom and all-comprehending fore- knowledge, may, for aught that appears, have the best of reasons for varying His methods of procedure. One such reason may here be suggested, namely, that occasional de- partures from strict uniformity would be the most striking and conclusive evidence conceivable of His free personality. And there is manifestly great need of just such evidence ; for that which is afforded by the uniformity of His opera- tions in nature is incomplete and obscure—at least, there are many whom it fails to convince. Hence it is that those scientists who deny the possibility or the fact of miracles gravitate, as by inevitable necessity, towards either ma- terialism or pantheism, and, in either case, to the denial of the personality of the First Cause, whilst this neither 1s 22 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE nor ever can be doubted by those who admit the fact or the possibility of miraculous phenomena. Also, it is evident that the conception of the First Cause as a free moral and personal Being is a nobler and more exalted idea of Him than that which represents Him—we ought rather to say, it, as an impersonal and fatal force; for a person is higher in the scale of being than a thing—a man is a nobler being than a steam-engine. The iruth is, that absolute reason, which is the principle of uniformity in the Divine operations, and absolute free-will or personality, without which no variation from such uniformity is conceivable, are both equally essential to the noblest idea which we can form of the Creator, to whom, as the work of His hands, we are bound in reason to ascribe all that we can conceive of excellence and perfection. What, then, is more to be anticipated than that He should reveal to us the sovereign perfection of His reason, wisdom and foreknowledge of all contingencies by the uniformity of His operations in nature, and by miracles, the fulness of His free personality? The conclusion which we have kept steadily in view in all the previous discussion, and indicated from time to time, is, that antecedently to all inductive evidence on the subject, it is more probable that miracles have occurred in the history of the world than that they have not, and, consequently, the phenomena which claim to be such re- quire no more or better evidence to substantiate them than other facts for which no such claim is made. Hence the burden of proof does not rest on those who advocate mira- cles, but on those'who maintain that they are impossible, or that they never have occurred, just as it would rest on him who should maintain that there never have been any such things as earthquakes or tornadoes. or the evidence which has produced the common belief of mankind in tornadoes, earthquakes and miracles must stand good until it is overthrown. Whether, indeed, the facts which have been called miraculous are truly such, is always an open ‘THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 93 question, until it has been finally decided by science, whether or not they can be accounted for by natural causes, or referred to uniform laws. If in this way they can be rationally explained, they must cease to be regarded as miracles, and remanded to the domain of natural phe- nomena, whatever may be the consequences. But to deny the facts themselves, or to require stronger evidence for them than for other facts, whilst the antecedent probability stands, as we here see, in favor of occasional non-uniform manifestations of Divine power, is unscientific and prepos- terous. It does not enter into the object of this discussion even to touch upon that vast array of inductive evidence which has been marshalled by theologians in defence of the miracles of Scripture, especially for those wrought by our Lord Jesus Christ. All that is here attempted is to show that they are in perfect harmony with the miraculous creation of the world, with the most rational a prior? con- ceptions we can form of what, its history would be, and with our noblest ideas of the character and perfections of God. There is no room for doubt, however, but that they are inseparable from, and are a chief corner-stone of Christian religion. Whoever denies them, especially the resurrection of Christ, or supposes that they may hereafter be explained by some as yet undiscovered law of physical causation, denies Christ, and must inevitably, if he be sufficiently strong in logic, become either a matcrialist or a pantheist. Stop short of this he cannot, except by reject- ing the legitimate consequences of his own principles—by halting in those very processes of thought which have led him to his present position. This argument, therefore, may fitly close with some suggestions of the enormous difficulties under which they labor who hold that the forces of nature are originally inherent in matter, and that from the uniform operation of these forces the existence of all things can be rationally explained. 24 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE First, then, these materialists can give no account what- ever of the origin or existence of matter as endowed with these properties or powers. Whence did it come? How came it to be thus mysteriously and wonderfully endowed? They do not pretend to answer these legitimate questions, but, with a frankness which is worthy of all praise, they say, We do not know. How much easier is it to believe in God as the Creator of matter, and as the: primary source of all the natural forces! But, in this case, the stupen- dous miracle of creation comes back upon us, along with all its consequences, as these have been exhibited. Secondly, they have no rational account to give of those innumerable correlations and adaptations in the cosmos which evince intelligence, purpose, design, as clearly and fully as it is conceivable that these could be manifested ; for, if intelli- gence had presided over the formation of the world, how could it have been made to appear otherwise than by just such correlations as we everywhere see? The physical, intellectual and moral correspondences between the two sexes, the mother’s bosom and the nourishment of her child, the stomach and its food, the heart and its blood, the lungs and the air, the eye and the light, the motions and order of the planetary and stellar worlds, the light and heat of the sun in their relation to the production, support and development of organic life, the intellectual faculties and their objects—all these, together with in- numerable similar correlations and adaptations, result, if we are to believe the materialist or pantheist, whether avowed or veiled under development theories, from the operation of blind unintelligent causes, the forces of nature which are the properties of matter. How much easier is it to believe in a God of infinite wisdom, power and good- ness, who created all these things in their beautiful and perfect adaptations to the purposes which they subserve! In the third place, the human soul, with all its wonderful powers or faculties of intellect, sensibility and will, is pro- THE MIRACLE OF CREATION 95 duced, according to science run mad, by the operation of the same forces or properties of matter, which themselves have no will, no sensibility, no intelligence. Is not this an effect. without any adequate cause? Is the maxim that “the quality of the effect is antecedently in its cause,” which has always been regarded as a necessary truth, and which lies at the foundation of all science and knowledge, no longer a truth? Can that which has no intelligence, no sensibility, and no will, be the cause of sensibility, in- telligence and will? How much easier is it to believe in God who created man in his own image! Finally, these men affirm that Christ and his apostles were either fanatics and fools, or impostors; that He himself never rose from the dead; that His mind and soul have utterly perished, and are asif they had never been. Credat Judeus Apella, non ego. And, again, how much easier is it to believe in God who raised up Jesus Christ from the dead! In the leisure of a summer vacation it happened that the author once read over almost consecutively Renan’s Vie de Jesus. He was quite carried away for the time by the magic of its sensuous style. When he had finished the work, he took up the Gospels, and read for an hour or two, and he here bears record that it was like coming up out of the sulphurous darkness of hell into the clear light and vital air of heaven. Again he sat at the feet of Jesus on the shore of the sea of Galilee. Peter and James and John were there, and Mary Magdalene, and Mary, the ever-blessed mother of the Lord. Once more he looked up with them into that dear face, and there beheld the wisdom, power and love of God revealed. There, also, in the face of Jesus Christ, he saw that his own soul was immortal, and that it was an object of the Divine compassion and love. Ah, how the tears flowed as he heard his Lord say, with what voice! “O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” Then it was as if he had stood on the banks of the river of life, which flows forth out of the 2 26 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE throne of God and the Lamb through the golden streets of the new Jerusalem, under the shade of the tree of life, which bears twelve manner of fruits, and yields her fruit every month, and whose leaves are for the healing of the nations. And there he resolved that, God helping him, he for one would go down into hell no more. aE II THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens. THE cosmogony of Moses has been often attacked and defended with arguments which seem alike unsound, and the controversy is yet undecided. Here, therefore, it is in place for us to examine the principal questions to which it has given rise, in order to see whether any further light can be thrown upon it. The subject, however, is a very extensive one, involving, as it does, the relation between science and religion in general, which requires to be eluci- dated before we can reach any right understanding of the cosmogony itself. Properly understood, however, nearly or quite all its alleged difficulties may be expected to dis- appear. It is quite evident, then, that the scepticism of modern times finds its strongest defences and support in the notion which, no doubt, is sincerely held by many, that the teach- ings of Divine revelation are somehow inconsistent and irreconcilable with the best ascertained results of physical science. Hence there has arisen a schism between science and religion which is productive of very deplorable con- sequences. Yet we may be sure that these twin-sisters cannot remain forever at feud. There must be some com- mon ground where reasonable people can stand without prejudice against either, and with their minds equally open to both of these grand sources of truth and human well- being. Indeed, it seems plain from the past history and present state of this controversy that it could never have 27 28 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE arisen unless either scientists or theologians had transcended their own legitimate department of knowledge and invaded the province or domain of the others. As a matter of fact, this error is justly chargeable on both parties, inasmuch as science is constantly presuming to question and even to deny the truths of religion, and religion, the truths of science. A thousand examples on either side might easily be given, such as the assumption—for, as we have seen, it is no more—by many scientists of absolute uniformity in all the operations of Divine power, so that miracles and answers to prayer become impossible, and, on the part of . theologians, such interpretations of Scripture as are incon- sistent with the most certain truths of science. We may be sure, therefore, that this baleful schism can never be healed until religion and science shall come to recognise each other as original and independent sources of truth, and as ultimate authorities, each within its own sphere. But this of itself would not give us a final solution of the problem, for the results accepted as truths on both sides might still be inconsistent. It is necessary, in addi- tion, that a principle of interpretation be established which, consistently applied to the whole Scripture, shall leave no legitimate ground for science to deny the truths of revela- tion, nor for religion to call in question the truths of science. Such a principle we here undertake to establish, not, in- deed, as anything new, but only as requiring a more rigor- ous verification and a more extensive application than it has hitherto received. When we come to apply it to the cosmogony we shall see what aid it will give us in solving its difficulties. This principle may be enunciated as follows : The Holy Scriptures were given to reveal moral and spiritual truths —it is no part of their object to teach the truths of science, upon which, consequently, they are no authority—a state- ment which requires, however, to be elucidated, and con- firmed. THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 99 A very slight acquaintance, then, with the origin, style and contents of the sacred records is enough to satisfy any one that it was no part of their object to reveal the truths of science.. For they originated and were communicated to the world through a nomad sheik and his tribe, than whom no people were ever more destitute of scientific ten- dencies and culture. If their object had included precise and infallible statements on matters of science, probably the Greeks would have been chosen for this purpose, for scien- tific tendencies and adaptations were as characteristic of the Greek mind as they were foreign to the Jew. As to their style, which will require to be more fully exhibited in the sequel, it is never scientific, but always and eminently popular, And, with respect to their contents, these are chiefly great moral and spiritual truths, such as the being and personality of God, that He created the universe, and man in His own likeness, that His moral laws are of eternal and immutable obligation, that man has fallen from the estate of innocence wherein he was created, and that God has redeemed the world from sin and misery by the most holy sacrifice of His only begotten Son. These truths are the great burden of the Christian Scriptures, the great ob- jects of Christian faith, and whatever there may be in the Bible which does not bear immediately upon them must be regarded as of secondary importance. Yet the failure to recognize this, or the notion that the Scripture must be taken as an infallible authority, not only upon moral and spiritual, but also on scientific ques- tions, or, at least, that its allusions and statements with respect to physical phenomena must somehow be harmo- nized withthe results of scientific investigation—this notion extensively prevails at the present time, and is productive of the most disastrous consequences. For not only does it put into the hands of sceptical scientists their most effective weapons, but also it vitiates and poisons theology itself. or, standing on this ground, theologians are under 80 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE a necessity to defend all Scriptural allusions to physical phenomena as scientifically accurate, and this view of them as essential to a true faith in the word of God. Con- sequently, whenever science establishes any new truth which bears upon them, so that it can no longer be called in question by reasonable people, theologians are sorely tempted to foist into the words of Scripture a sense in harmony with it which they were never intended to bear. In this way all true principles of exegesis are confounded in order to make Divine revelation teach whatever human science, in its progressive development and unceasing changes, may at any time be thought to require. And where this expedient seems to be impracticable, they be- come liable to a worse temptation, namely, to deny the most certain results of science in order to maintain their faith in the revelation. For thus they have often been heard to say to scientists, This is contrary to the word of God; if you prove your point we must give up our Bible. Then, after the point has been proved and universally accepted, the scientist replies, Why do you not give up your Bible, as you said you would? Thus our holy faith is made an object of sceptical mockery. As an example of this, we may be allowed to recall here the well-worn story of Galileo, the significance of which, as it would seem, has never yet been fully appreciated. For it is still a most instructive fact, that formerly the Scriptures were universally understood to teach the geocen- tric system of the physical universe—that the earth was the immovable centre of motion to the sun, moon and stars. But when Galileo came to see that this construction of the cosmos was no longer tenable, and substituted in its place the solicentric system—that the earth and other planets revolved around the sun—the alarm which was awakened in the minds of theologians by this complete revolution in astronomical science was so great that it is hardly conceivable by us at the present time. Conse- THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 91 quently they resisted it with all their immense influence ; and, having “the powers that be” on their side, they com- pelled this foremost man of all the world to repudiate the truth in order to save his life. Now who can estimate the enormity of this scandal? Yet the lesson which it teaches has been very imperfectly learned. For similar though perhaps not such extreme oppositions to scientific discov- eries have been made in our time. We have had the most embittered discussions of the age of the earth, of the length of time during which it has been inhabited by man, and of other matters of science, which theologians had long ago determined by the authority of Scriptures. In allusion to these scandals the venerable Archibald Alexander, formerly professor in the theological seminary at Princeton, was accustomed to say to his classes: “Young gentlemen, you should never say to the men of science, If you prove this or that, we must give up our Bible. On the contrary, you ought to say, Go on, gentle- men, make all the discoveries you can, for we are not afraid of the truth. But please to remember that, whilst you are dispucding among yourselves, we are not obliged to accept the views of any party. It is our place to wait until you have come to an agreement; and when you shall have established any new truth, so that you yourselves no longer dispute about it, we will accept it without fear that it will have any bad effect on our faith. For since, as we hold, the Author of nature and of revelation is one and the same infinitely wise and good Being, true science and true religion can never have any quarrel with each other.” Now, if. this beautiful rule of practical wisdom were constantly followed, it would leave little or no ground of controversy between science and religion, but harmony would be established in the future history of these two great and co-ordinate factors of Christian civilization, between which, in fact, there never has been any opposition but that which has arisen either from “ science falsely so 32 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE called,” or from unsound and indefensible interpretations of Scripture. The principle which has thus been enunciated and de- veloped we shall find abundantly confirmed, and its appli- cations illustrated by a somewhat particular consideration of the Scriptural allusions and statements with respect to physical phenomena. J or there was a necessity that such allusions should occur on every page, and almost in every sentence, from the vast number of natural objects which aired to be mentioned; and these objects had to be spoken of by name long pata scientific nomenclatures were invented—before Gee was any such thing as science in the world. Now, in what forms of expression ought we to expect that these unavoidable allusions and _ state- ments with respect to the legitimate subjects of future scientific investigation would be made—whether, in terms scientifically correct and adequate, so that no subsequent progress in science should ever be able to criticise them, or in popular language, such as was spoken at the time when the revelation was given, and such as the most illiterate and ignorant people, who yet had souls to be saved, could understand?. Since the question does not seem satisfactorily to answer itself, we here undertake to demonstrate that the former method or procedure was impracticable, and that the latter was the only one that could be followed. For if these Scriptural allusions to physical phenomena had been made in forms of expression scientifically correct and adequate, the Bible would have been unintelligible to all the generations of mankind who lived and died before the birth of science, and still such to the nations and great masses who are destitute of scientific culture. In order to see this, we need only consider that a scientific expression of the sun’s rising and setting would be something like this: The earth revolving on its axis reveals and shies the sun. But, at the ge the Scriptures were given, no THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY Do one, not even Moses, though learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, could have understood such words: and the expression itself is so clumsy that we ourselves cannot use it; we continue to say, The sun rises and sets, knowing all the time that it is as far as possiblefrom being scientifi- cally correct. Hence we cannot logically infer from their use of such expressions that the sacred writers were ignorant of the Copernican or Newtonian theory of the universe, although it would be absurd, no doubt, to sup- pose them acquainted with it. Since, then, these physical phenomena had to be mentioned or referred to in almost every sentence, if scientific terms had been employed, the Scriptures would have been unintelligible to all men at the time they were written, and, doubtless, would have been universally rejected as the ravings of insanity. If they could have been preserved, which is hardly supposable, no one could ever have understood them until they had come to be interpreted by modern science. Nor would they have been any more intelligible to us at this day than to those of former ages. For science is not yet perfect, nor ever indeed can be. It is constantly making progress and changing its nomenclature and its modes of conceiving of physical objects—and, doubtless, it will always continue to do so. Thus, what lately it called caloric it now calls a form or mode of motion, and the term caloric is no longer used. So, also, light, which was formerly a fluid, is now the result of vibrations in ether. Consequently, the time may come, nay, is sure to come, when many of its now cur- rent forms of expression will be found incorrect and in- adequate, as involving more or less of erroneous conception and theory, and will be superseded by others in accordance with more advanced knowledge. Hence we see that these allusions in the Scriptures to physical phenomena, in order that they should be absolutely correct and unchangeable, must have been made in terms corresponding, not to the present, but to the still future and last developments of 2x o4 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE science: in which case, they would have been unintelligible to us, and to how many of the coming generations of mai- kind we cannot tell. Moreover, since it is impossible to understand a scien- tific expression of any great physical phenomenon, such as the rotating earth reveals and_ hides the sun, without ac- quaintance with the cosmical theory to which it belongs, it would have been necessary, in order to meet this difficulty, that there should be revealed in the Scriptures, not only the truths of religion, but also a perfect system of science. But self-evidently this was no part of the object for which they were given, and the attempt would have introduced inconceivably greater difficulties than it could have re- moved. For (1) it would have made the Bible of such enormous bulk that, it is safe to say, no one person could ever have read it through. (2) Such a revelation of science would itself have been utterly unintelligible. For the human mind is the subject of development. It has had to grow up through all the ages of the past, in order to become capable of mastering that vast and complex sys- tem of knowledge which is included in the word science. If such a system had been revealed from heaven with the utmost clearness, it could no more have been comprehended during the early stages of the human mind than it can be now by little children. If, e. g., all that is signified by the mariner’s compass, naval architecture, steam navigation, the ocean telegraph, and other such expressions, had been revealed to Cimon or Themistocles, those old Greek admi- rals whose most daring voyages hugged the shores of the Mediterranean, and who were hardly ever out of sight of land in their lives—is it conceivable they could have com- prehended it? or it is impossible for man, even by the aid of any revelation, to bridge the great ocean of thought which lies between his knowledge at any given period and that to which he will arrive step by step in the progress of thousands of years. (3) Moreover, if we suppose that THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 30 such a revelation of science had been given, and that it could have been understood, it would have superseded that laborious exercise of the human faculties in experl- ment, research and reasoning which, according to all experience, is indispensable to their development and growth. For the search after truth has been held by some of the greatest minds the world has ever seen to be more conducive to mental power than the truth itself. In the words of Lessing: “If you place the truth before me, on the one hand, and on the other, the search for truth, I take the search.” This may be an overstatement, but there lies ‘nit this much at least which is unquestionable, that, as man is constituted, his intellectual faculties could never have been developed so as to comprehend science other- wise than by means of that strenuous exercise of them through which all his discoveries have been made and all his progress achieved. Hence it is evident that there were overwhelming rea- sons why the revelation did not, and could not, make the necessary allusions and statements with respect to physical phenomena in scientific terms. We see here an absolute necessity that they should be managed in some other way ; and we pass on now to the consideration of this other method which was actually adopted, and which, it is claimed, is followed out with perfect consistency from the first chapter of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse. Here, then, recurring to the typical expression, the sun rises and sets, we see that it is derived from the impression which the phenomena make upon the sense of sight—from that which appears, and not at all from the scientific truth which underlies the appearance; and this impression, let it be observed, is necessarily the same at all times and places, and for all persons on the earth. Consequently the expression which is derived from it must always have been, and must forever continue to be, universally intel- ligible. In whatever language of “articulately-speaking 36 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE men” it may be said, the sun rises and sets, the most ignorant and stupid people will always understand what is meant. Hence we may safely predict that this expression will continue to hold its ground through all possible changes in the scientific exploration and comprehension of the phenomena which it represents. For human language originated in, and draws its perennial nourishment from, the impressions which the phenomena of the world make upon the senses. In the Hebrew of the Old Testament, however, the corresponding expression is slightly different, being in this form, the sun goes forth and enters in. Here the impression made upon the senses is somewhat modified by a philosophical conception in explanation of the phenomena which seems to have prevailed at the time, and which is more fully unfolded in the words of the Psaimist: “The sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong mun to run a race.” Jor the Hebrews, as other ancient peoples, seem to have conceived of the sun as having his sleeping chamber under the earth, from which, at one door, he came forth in the morning, and into which, at the opposite door, he re entered in the evening. Closely analyzed, this expres- sion is found to be in part sensuous, and in part philo- sophical, which, no doubt, is the reason why it has not been able to maintain its ground, but has given place to the purely sensuous one which we employ. If, now, we had time to examine all the allusions and statements with respect to physical phenomena which occur in the Scrip- tures, we should find that they are all made in forms of expression similar to this by which the sun’s apparent motion was represented; that is to say, in forms originally derived from the impressions made upon the senses, but often modified by philosophical conceptions in explanation of the phenomena which prevailed among the people to whom the revelation was immediately communicated. It remains for us to furnish satisfactory evidence upon this THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY - 27 point, which must consist of a few examples taken almost at random from literally thousands precisely similar. 1. First, then, the inspired writers, whether of the Old or New Testament, certainly had no knowledge of the true relation of the sun to the earth and planetary system, nor of those which the heavenly bodies in general bear to each other. For it did not enter into the purely moral and spiritual object of Divine revelation that this knowledge should be communicated to them; and, as we have seen, any attempt to reveal a complete science would have met with insuperable difficulties. Consequently they, like other people of their time, conceived of the earth as the greatest of all the cosmical bodies, and of the sun, moon and stars as dependent upon it, and as created for the benefit and service of its inhabitants. In strict accordance with this conception they never allude to the sun as the centre of attraction or motion to the planetary worlds, but everywhere they speak of all the heavenly bodies as created and placed in the firmament “to give light upon the earth,” and to “be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years.” 2. In the second place, the conception of the earth which uniformly appears in the Scriptures is that of a solid, | immovable body, with a plane, or perhaps a slightly convex surface. This, indeed, was the conception of it which universally prevailed in ancient times; and, hence, as was inevitable, speculation was everywhere rife as to what it was founded on, or by what its weight was supported. Some imagined one thing, and some another, but no satis- factory account of the matter could be given, for obviously, in accordance with this conception, the difficulty did not admit of a final solution. In order to illustrate this point, which has important relations to others that are to follow, we subjoin here an old Hindoo scheme of the universe.* # See Diagram in Religions De L’ Antiquité, par. J. G. Guigniaut, Vol. vi, plate 115, 38 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE First of all, we have here a mathematical triangle, from which a glory is streaming in all directions, which among the Hindoos was an ever-recurring symbol of the 7rimurti, or three-form ineffable nature of the Deity. For after all that has been written in explanation of this mysterious symbol, it is more than probable that a dim shadow or reflection of the Triune Jehovah had somehow fallen upon the minds of this wonderful heathen people. Immediately | below this triangle, we have seven heavens, each of the superior ones resting on the next under it, which were believed to be the abodes of their inferior divinities, and of those rishis or sages who, by their knowledge and aus- terities, rather than by their moral virtues, had raised themselves to an equality with the gods. The lowest heaven rests upon celestial clouds; the clouds upon a supernal ocean; this ocean upon a solid sky or firmament ; the firmament upon the backs of a troop of elephants, which stand with their feet on the earth; the earth, which is convex above but flat beneath, rests upon four other elephants of stupendous vastness, one at each of the four cardinal points of the compass—the space between them under the earth is Patala, or Hades—these elephants stand on the back of an immense tortoise, which rests on the coils of an enormous serpent; and this serpent, finally, after furnishing this support, forms a circle around the whole vast scheme, with its extremities meeting above the triangle, on which it seems to hang, and by which the weight of the whole universe is sustained. In this way, these old thinkers, grappling with the difficulty just alluded to, represented all the spiritual and material worlds as depending upon one triune, ineffable, Divine Being. The whole scheme, as we see, combines the puerile and the sublime in a truly wonder ful manner. Now, it is very remarkable that the Christian Shot are wholly free from such puerilities. For they leave the whole subject in that insoluble mystery which is insepara- TIE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 39 ble from this conception of the earth as a solid immovable body. In many passages of great sublimity, they rep- resent the question as to what it was founded on as one of the deep mysteries of God. In one of these He is repre- sented as rebuking the rebellious spirit of the patriarch Job in the following words: “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Deciare, if thou hast understanding, who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? Or who hath stretched the line upon it? Where- upon are the foundations thereof fastened? Or who hath laid the corner-stone thereof?” Surely every attempt to explain such expressions as mere figures of speech, or in any way consistently with the conception of the earth as having no foundations, must be worse than idle—a perver- sion of the most certain laws of language, and such that, if similar methods be applied to the revelations of moral and spiritual truth, the result must be, that we shall get out of the Bible just what we please. Nor are the repre- sentations which occur elsewhere, such as this, “He hang- eth the earth upon nothing,” to be interpreted in opposi- tion to the plain sense of the preceding quotation, and to innumerable other passages of similar import, as if they were intended to harmonize with our knowledge, that the earth is a globe suspended in space and upheld by the attraction of gravitation, but they are to be understood as simply expressive of the mystery of the thing as it lay before the minds of the sacred writers. | 3. A third conception in explanation of physical phe- nomena which prevailed among the ancient Hebrews was, that a great body of water existed under the earth, by which they accounted for springs and wells. or this rising of water out of the ground on the tops of hills and moun- tain sides was a great mystery to the old world, and it is frequently alluded to in the Scriptures as a wonderful manifestation of the power of God. Thus in the follow- ing words: “He sendeth the springs into the valleys, 40 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE which run [literally, which break or rise] among the hills.” Now, the sacred writers make no attempt to cor- rect this erroneous notion in science, because that was not included in the object for which they were inspired. On the contrary, they express themselves in accordance with it in a great multitude of places and variety of connections, as in the following instances: “The earth above the waters... The waters under the earth... The deep that lieth under... The fountains of the great deep.” 4, A fourth conception of a similar character was, that the sky was a solid substance, or firmament properly so called, which also seems to have prevailed universally in ancient times, as it still does wherever science has made little or no progress. Children always have this notion, | and savages cannot be convinced to the contrary. The reason is, that the deep blue of the sky makes this im- pression upon the sense of sight; for how can mere void space have any color? Now, indeed, it is well known that this is due to the atmosphere which surrounds the earth, and the author has seen and handled a transparent gas, similar to the atmospheric air, but condensed and frozen solid by an experiment in the laboratory, the color of which was precisely the deep blue of the sky on a _ clear day. Hence the oldest names of the sky in many languages, and probably in all, either signify or imply solidity. Our word heaven -means primarily that which has been heaved up by the exertion of force, and which consequently has solidity and weight. The Hebrew Y pe and the Greek oreogwya, by which it is translated, and the Latin firmamentum, are the exact equivalents of the word firmament in the English Bible. They all alike signify that which is solid, compact, firm. They cannot be soundly interpreted in the sense of a void expanse, as some scholars, in their zeal to harmonize the Scriptural allusions to natural phenomena with science, would maintain. This interpretation is utterly inconsistent, not only with the THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 41 proper meaning of the words, but, also, as we shall see hereafter, with the connections in which they stand. For this Hebrew word, of which the Greek, Latin and English are, of course, mere translations, is derived from a root which signifies to expand by hammering out, as iron or gold or other metal is expanded into solid sheets. It has no meaning whatever apart from the idea of solidity. Ac- cordingly we find allusions or statements expressing or implying this conception in almost all the places where the sky is mentioned in the Bible, such as the following: “Hast thou with Him spread out the sky, which is strong and as a molten looking-glass?” For the molten mirror here, as elsewhere, must, of course, be understood as being of polished metal, and we shall see directly why this quality of strength is attributed to it. Again: “And they saw the God of Israel, and there was under His feet, as it were, a paved work of a sapphire stone, and, as it were, the body [literally, the bone] of heaven.” The manner in which the firmament is spoken of in the cosmogony will require to be examined hereafter, and need not be further referred to here, except to remark that the words which represent the birds as flying “in the open firmament of heaven,” are now recognized by all Hebrew scholars as a mistranslation : they should be, “in the face of the firma- ment,” that is, under it. 5. Still another conception which prevailed among the Hebrews and other ancient peoples was, that above the firmament—in which it is expressly stated that the stars were set or fixed—and this, by the way, is the origin of the expression, the fixed stars, which we still retain, though in a different sense—that above the solid sky, and sup- ported by it, there was another great body of water,’ corre- sponding to “the water under the earth”, and identical with the supernal ocean in the Hindoo scheme. This seems to have been their explanation of the phenomena of rain. or as the water in fountains and wells was supposed to come 42 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE from “the deep that lieth under”, so the rain was supposed to fall from “the waters which were above the firmament.” The relation which the clouds bore to rain-falls in this conception does not fully appear. Perhaps they were regarded as a kind of sieve by which the water, as it fell from the firmament, was separated into drops, and sprinkled over the earth, in order to its more effectual fertilization. There’ may be an allusion to this in the words: “He maketh small the drops of water... which the clouds drop and distil”. The allusions and statements in the Scriptures which either express or imply this conception of waters above the sky are almost innumerable, such as the follow- ing: “Praise him ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens... The river of God which is full of water... A multitude of waters in the heavens” : and others which will be referred to in the sequel. But here it should be mentioned, that some of the most striking and significant of these allusions, both to the waters above the firmament and to those under the earth, occur in the account of the deluge, where it is stated, that “all the fountains of the great deep were broken up’’, so that. the waters under the earth burst up in boundless floods ; and that “the windows [literally, the flood-gates] of heaven were opened”, so that the waters above the firmament came down in mighty torrents. In this way the deluge is: ac- counted for ; and, if we fail to recognize this conception of the physical universe in which these expressions originated, the sublimity of this whole picture is well-nigh lost. 6. Besides such allusions and statements as these with respect to great cosmical phenomena, we find similar references to minor particulars of which it must suffice to reproduce here one or two examples, as follows: “‘The ostrich which leaveth her eggs in the earth...and for- getteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them. She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers. Her labor is vain, THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY | 43 because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding...The daughter of my people is become cruel like the ostriches in the wilderness”. Now, it is quite true that the ostrich sometimes leaves her nest in the noon of the tropical day, as do other birds, to prevent their eggs from being actually cooked by the heat of their bodies, but these passages do not exhibit her true character and habits, as we know them from the testimony of a great number of perfectly trust-worthy eye-witnesses. For she is, in fact, an uncommonly prudent and affectionate mother-bird. She broods on her eggs with the utmost assiduity. When she leaves them for a brief space to pro- cure food or water, the male bird takes her place on the nest till she returns. Both of them fight desperately, even to the loss of their own lives, in defence of their young. They practice the most cunning stratagems to deceive the hunter ; for, like the lapwing and some other birds, they pretend to be wounded and crippled, when he approaches their young, and go fluttering and floundering along upon the ground to draw him off in pursuit of themselves. In all this, we do not see an example of cruelty, nor a creature “hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers”, nor one which ‘God has deprived of wisdom and understanding’, 7. Again, we find that animals of the pachyderm and rodent classes are prohibited by Moses as unclean on the ground that, though ruminants, as he pronounces them to be, they are not cloven-footed : “The coney, because he chew- eth the cud, but divideth not the hoof—he is unclean unto you: and the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof—he is unclean unto you”. Now the word DY, shaphan, which is here erroneously translated, coney, designates, as is generally agreed, a little pachyderm animal resembling the coney, which last, as also the hare, are ro- dents. Both the shaphan and the hare are still believed by the Arabs to be ruminants, though neither of them has the 44 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE fourfold stomach, nor other traits of physical organization, which are characteristic of all animals which chew the eud. This popular error originated, no doubt, from the fact that the rodents have a peculiar motion of the mouth and checks, produced by their rubbing the edges of their cutting teeth upon each other to prevent them from growing too long, which gives them a striking appearance of rumina- tine. Now Moses, as in all similar cases, speaks of them according to this appearance, and does not recognize the scientific truth which underlies it, with which, in fact, he could have nothing to do. For the distinction between clean and unclean animals was one which all classes of his people had constantly to make, both for purposes of food and sacrifice, and in which they could discriminate no other- wise than by such outward signs ; and, if they had been allowed to disregard these signs in the case of these animals, it would have been well-nigh impossible to have kept up the distinction in other cases. To these it may be added, that the doing of certain things is claimed in Scripture as the exclusive prerogative of God, which science has since brought within the reach of human power. For the question is addressed to Job, as if but one answer could possibly be given to it: “Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are ?” Now, it seems impossible to choose words which should more exactly describe what we are doing every day in connection with the electric telegraph. ‘The lightnings do now say to us, with utmost docility, Here we are, send us ; and we send them with our messages from continent to continent and from pole to pole. These few examples are all that we have space to give— but surely they are enough—to illustrate and verify our main proposition, that the Scriptures always speak of natural phenomena in forms of expression originally de- rived from the impressions which they make upon the senses, but often modified by philosophical conceptions in THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY AD explanation of these phenomena, such as were current at the time when, and among the people to whom, the revela- tion was at first communicated. For certainly it was no part of their exclusively spiritual object to correct these impressions or conceptions, however erroneous they might be. The limitations imposed upon them by their great moral and spiritual object made it absolutely indispensable that they should never concern themselves with the scien- tific truths which underlie the phenomena of the physical universe, but should leave all these to be discovered and expounded by science. For if they had spoken of these things otherwise than in free and popular language, no one could have understood them ; and if they had undertaken to correct all the popular misconceptions of natural objects which prevailed, there would have been no end to the Bible—it would have been a sealed book to those who first received it, also to us at the present time, and to how many of the future generations of mankind no one can tell. We do not claim, however, that the views which have _ now been presented are free from difficulties. for it may be objected against them that the two spheres of faith and science are not absolutely exclusive, but, to some extent at least, do interpenctrate and overlap upon each other; that, in the attempt to distinguish between what is of moral and spiritual import in the Scriptures and that which is not, we must be liabie to very deleterious errors ; that our principle of interpretation implies a low view of inspiration ; and, in fine, that it cannot be applied to the Mosaic cosmogony without impairing its claim upon our faith as a Divine revelation. Now it must be conceded that these are grave objections and require to be fairly ap- preciated. (1) First, then, we frankly admit that some matters of faith do come within the purview of sciences But this is a difficulty which cannot be wholly avoided whatever views be taken of the subject. For, in any case, science 4G WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE within her own legitimate sphere, which is that of deter- mining the laws of nature, may have something to say on the question of miracles by way of sifting the evidence on which they rest, upon superstition and other similar matters. But the principle which we here advocate has this great advantage over all others, that it reduces to a minimum the number of those questions in which it may be claimed that both faith and science are concerned. In fact, it leaves very few, and these such as are most easily defended, in which the most sceptical science can have any temptation to deny what a true faith in the word of God must ever maintain. (2) In the second place, our liability to error in dis- criminating between that which is moral and spiritual in the Word and that which is not, does not seem to be any greater than it is in the distinction which we have con- stantly to make between fundamentals, or essentials to sal- vation, and matters of secondary importance. TI‘or some things “the Scriptures principally teach;” other things are not principal, but subordinate. Now, whatever our liability to error in either case, the sole question for us is, whether God has not laid upon us the responsibility of making these distinctions. If He has, then we have the promise of the illumination and guidance of His Spirit to enable us to make the distinction aright; and, in proof that He has, we have the whole preceding argument, the force of which, however, we cannot fairly appre~ ciate without guarding ourselves against our natural dread of responsibility. For we have the most sorrowful evi- dence that there is a deep longing in the human heart for a more comprehensive revelation than God has seen fit to give us. Great moral and spiritual truths do not satisfy this morbid craving. We want a Bible alike authorita- tive in matters of science and matters of faith. We want an infallible church to determine for us what the revela- tion teaches, and to decide all our perplexing cases of con- THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY AT science. This is depraved human nature; and it is the claim to such infallibility in the Romish church which, as much perhaps as anything else, attracts the ignorant mul- titudes who submit themselves to her authority and follow her banner. We shall err if we think ourselves exempt from this temptation ; and it is indispensable that we keep ourselyes on guard against it, if we would estimate at anything like its true value the evidence, that God has placed us all under the solemn responsibility of distin- guishing between that in His word which belongs to the moral and spiritual object for which exclusively it was given, and that which is, so to speak, the necessary mate- rial framework in which His saving truth is exhibited to our minds. (3) In the third place, all that has just been said is of equal force against the objection, that our principle of in- terpretation implies a low view of inspiration. or the question which we have to meet on this point is not surely one of high or low, but, simply, what is the true view? Yet it may be observed, that neither the highest nor the lowest is probably the truest. The former, in- deed, would relieve us of the greatest amount of respons- ibility but the latter would go far to rob us of the word of God. The antecedent probability would seem to be in favor of a middle ground, which is proverbially the safest, and on which, as we think, the most thoughtful and learned and judicious have ever been found. In mediis tutissimus ibis. But however this may be, it certainly is both unphilo- sophical and unfair to hold the Scriptures responsible for infallible accuracy of allusion and statement in matters which they were not given to teach. And upon what rational grounds can it be demanded that they should har- monize with the results of modern science in other similar allusions with more precision than they do in those which 48 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE they make to the rising and setting of the sun? The con- sistent application of our principle to all similar cases cannot possibly affect our views of inspiration otherwise than as they are necessarily affected by the interpretation which we must give to these typical expressions. (4) Finally, the objections which may be urged against applying this principle to the cosmogony are, no doubt, the most difficult of all to meet. Yet what can be more unreasonable than to require that the Bible, in this its first chapter, should treat of physical phenomena in language scientifically correct and adequate, when it does this nowhere else? Nor is it possible so to interpret its words without imposing upon them a sense which they were not intended to bear, nor without peril to great moral and spiritual interests; in other words, this procedure cannot fail to introduce far greater difficulties than those which it claims to remove. For the interpretation which is now commonly adopted for this purpose, and which is the only one which can be made in the least plausible, includes the following par- ticulars: Moses exhibits the creation, not as it actually took place, but as it appeared, or would have appeared, to an observer stationed on the earth: what he calls the six days of creation were, in fact, geologic or demiurgic eras of immense duration: the words create and make, in the record, are to be distinguished from each other, the former as signifying creation, properly so called, and the latter, formation out of pre-existing materials, or, simply, causing to appear. In this scheme, also, great stress is laid upon the order of creation, which, it is claimed, agrees substan- tially with the results of modern science. Now against all this we urge the following counter- objections : (a). It is a harsh and incongruous supposition that Moses intended to represent the creation; not as it actually took place, but as it would have appeared to an observer sta- THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 49 tioned on the earth, inasmuch as he gives us no intimation of any such design, and could not fail to be misunderstood, as he always has been; also, because, when the creation commenced, there was no earth upon which an observer could be stationed, and, if there had been, there was no observer to occupy it as a point of observation. (b) The order of creation given in the cosmogony does not agree with that which science requires, in that it represents the sun as having been created on the fourth day, and the plants or vegetable world on the third. Now we know that all vegetable organisms depend for their existence on the light and heat of the sun, and it is incon- ceivable that they could have lived and flourished through a whole geologic age of many thousands of years before the sun was created. Also it represents the earth as having been created on the first day. Now, the cosmical depend- ence of the earth, as one of the planets, upon the sun as its centre of attraction and motion, render it impossible to conceive of it as existing three or four geologic ages before the sun. We say nothing of light because it is now known that it is not exclusively dependent upon the sun. _(c) It was for the purpose of removing the preceding difficulties that the distinction was invented between the words create and make. For the advocates of this scheme call our attention to the fact that it is not said, the sun was created; but that he was made on the fourth day. They understand that he was created before, although Moses says no such thing, but that he did not shine through the chaotic clouds until the fourth period. Now this distine- tion rests wholly on the necessities of this scheme. No other evidence has ever been advanced in support of it. Nor can it be maintained—it is perfectly arbitrary. For these two words with all their derivatives are used as equivalents and synonyms both in this record and throughout the Scriptures. Of this innumerable examples eo ree given such as the following: “God created the 50 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE} heaven and the earth... The Lord God made the earth and the heavens... Remember thy Creator... Let us kneel before the Lord our Maker.” Besides, it is said that God created the living creatures, where, according to this distinction, the word made ought to have been used, as it is in the case of vegetable organisms. Since, then, these words are used as equivalents, if one of them be thus limited to the sense of forming or causing to appear, the other may be also; in which case, for aught that appears, there may never have been any true or proper creation, but matter may be eternal. This is one of the great spiritual interests which are imperiled by this method of interpretation. (d) The objections to understanding the word firma- ment as a void expanse, have already been given in part by analysis of the Hebrew, Greek, Latin and English words. But that is an argument which only scholars can appreciate. We now present one of a different character, of the validity of which any one can judge for himself. Let us observe, then, in what terms Moses speaks of the sky in the cosmogony itself: “ And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firma- ment, and divided the waters which were under the firma- ment from the waters which were above the firmament... and He set them [the sun and moon] in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth.” Now, here is one of those cases previously alluded to, in which, if it be ever possible to determine the sense of a word from the connection in which it stands, this word cannot have the meaning of a void expanse. For the firmament is here represented as that which God created to divide the waters below from those which were above it; but there are no waters above the void expanse, neither are there any below it, since it is itself illimitable space. Besides, God is repre- sented as being occupied the whole of the second day in crea- THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY 51 ting the firmament—He did nothing else on that day—but how can a void expanse, that is, nothing at all, be spoken of as a work of creation? And this ditficulty is greatly en- hanced by taking these six days in the sense of geologic periods of immense duration. Was the Creator occupied for a hundred thousand years in creating—nothing ? Surely it must be evident from all this that the firmament was conceived of by Moses as having a substance more solid than water, in order that it should divide one body of it from another; and this, by the way, gives us the reason why such great strength is ascribed to it in a pre- vious quotation, namely, because it was supposed to sustain the weight of a superincumbent ocean. (e) It only remains to point out that these six days are rigorously defined in the common meaning of the word by the explicit statement, that each of them had its morning and evening, and still more clearly, perhaps, by the con- secration of the Sabbath on the ground that God himself “rested on the seventh day, and was refreshed.” For if this seventh day be understood as of a different kind from the preceding six, the most fundamental law of logical analysis—that all the parts into which any given theme is analyzed must be obtained by application of one and the same principle—is violated. For if the first six days be taken as geologic ages, and the seventh as a period of twenty-four hours, we have seven parts which cannot be obtained from the theme on any one principle of analysis. The force of this objection will be better appreciated by students of logic and rhetoric when their attention is directed to this Mosaic scheme of creation as, beyond com- parison, the most beautiful specimen of analysis within the whole compass of literature. In fine, that the word day should have a different meaning in other connections, where it occurs without any such definition or limitation, as, “In the day that the Lord God made the earth and. the heavens,” is in strict accordance with all the laws and 52 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE usages of language. But to impose such an indefinite meaning upon it in disregard of its connection, and in the face of this definition, is a violation of all exegetical rules, and even of the laws of analytic thinking, such as tends to unsettle and confound all right principles of interpretation, and of thought itself. These are some of the objections which lie against this method of harmonizing the cosmogony with the results of modern science. Is it not evident that it imposes upon the words of Moses a sense which they were never intended to bear, imperils some of the most important of revealed truths, and thus introduces far greater difficulties than those which it claims to remove? And who can foresee where this procedure applied to other parts of the Scerip- ture may ultimately lead us? For it is not physical science alone with which we have to do. Anthropology, also, and psychology, and biology, to say nothing of historical criticism, are now putting in their claims to govern our interpretations of the word of God—sciences which have a direct bearing upon its moral and-spiritual import. Now, when we come, for precisely similar rea- sons, to impose upon it every meaning which the sceptical tendencies of these rapidly developing sciences may at any time seem to require, what is likely to become of its deliverances concerning the fall of man, human depravity, the incarnation and the atonement ? These difficulties seem to us immeasurably greater than any which can arise from the most rigorous application of the principle of interpretation for which we here contend. For nothing in the cosmogony itself, or in any other part of the Bible, which can possibly be claimed as of any moral or spiritual import, is in the least affected by it. No such claim can be made for the length of time during which the work of creation was going on, nor for the order in which it took place, nor for the existence of a firmament, nor for a body of water above the firmament, provided THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY DS that God be understood to have created all things consti- tuting the universe. for evidently it was Moses’ chief object to cover this one point by the particularization and details of his analysis. But in all these specifications and particulars he speaks of the physical world in free and popular language, as it is spoken of everywhere else in the Scriptures, and in accordance with the impressions which it makes upon the senses, and with the conceptions of it which prevailed when he lived, and which, no doubt, he shared with all others of his time. All these, therefore, are to be taken as the material and human framework, so to speak, of this sublime picture of the creation of the world, in which it is revealed to our faith: That there is but one only living and true God; that He is a free, personal Being of infinite wisdom, power and goodness ; that by the word of His power He created all things, especially man, male and female, in His own likeness; that He consecrated one day in seven to be kept holy to himself by all mankind ; and whatever else there may be in this account which is of any moral or spiritual signifi- cance. It would seem that these great truths are enough for one short chapter in the Bible. For they lie at the foundation of all true religion, and stand in direct contra- diction to atheism, materialism, pantheism, dualism, polytheism, idolatry and fetishism—those deadly errors which have always dominated over the human mind wherever they have not been driven out by the revelation of himself which God has given us here and throughout the Holy Scriptures. In conclusion, by the adoption and consistent application of this principle of interpretation, the malignant enemies of true religion—that ‘seed of the serpent who are permitted to bruise the heel of the Seed of the woman, whilst He crushes their heads’—would be deprived of their deadliest fangs. For if they should find in the Scriptures innu- merable allusions and statements with respect to natural 5A “WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE objects which are not in accordance with the scientific truths underlying the phenomena, what would it all amount to, more than is contained in the one expression, the sun rises and sets? Thus, also, science would be left free to do her own great and blessed work, unimpeded by fear or misgiving lest her ever-multiplying discoveries should come into conflict with revealed truth. Besides, which is of even greater importance, as many of her votaries as are at all sensible of their spiritual necessities—and such, no doubt, are as numerous as in any other class of people— would be relieved from their peculiar difficulties and temptations to unbelief, and would find that peace and joy which the gospel brings to the heart of every true believer. Then the aid which they would bring to its defense and propagation—who can estimate how great and effectual it would be? Moreover, the readers and inter- preters of the word of God would be delivered from that sore temptation with which they are now beset, to impose upon its words meanings which they were never intended to bear, and which without abuse they cannot be-made to bear—a procedure which greatly injures the conscience, and mightily confounds the science of hermeneutics, But that which perhaps is of greater importance than all other advantages is, that these “oppositions of science” would no longer dwarf the faith nor mar the peace of God’s dear children, as they do now in a multitude of cases, And hence we may expect that the faith and spiritual power of the church, delivered from this incubus, will erow up to “the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,” and go forth again, as it did in primitive times, to conquer and save the world. Itt THE CREATION OF MAN And God said, Let us make Man... And the Lord God formed the man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living soul... Male and female created He them... and called their name man in the day when they were created... And God created... every living creature that moveth .. . after their kind. THE origin of the human race has always been a subject of universal and transcendent interest. For the question whence we have come involves also what we are and whither we are going. The answer to the first of these determines the answers which must be given to both the others. Hence the statements here made in the Mosaic record cannot be classed with those which have just been considered as matters of indifference, but must be regarded and treated as revelations of the very deepest moral and spiritual significance. Moreover, the interest in this sub- ject was never greater than it is now, when sceptical science, transcending her legitimate sphere and invading the prov- ince of theology, calls in question the truth of this account of the origin of mankind, whereby the faith of multitudes in the word of God is shaken to its foundations. Here, then, it is in placefor us to examine this record with reference to the objections which scientists have brought against it. Before entering upon this discussion, however, it should be premised, that it is altogether irrational for us to submit our minds blindly to the general theories, hypotheses, in- ferences, reasonings, speculations which are so confidently 56 56 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE put forth in the name of science, for multitudes of them, of which only examples can be given here, are as unscien- tific as possible. We should ever bear in mind that scien- tists, like all other men, are fallible, and quite as much addicted to discursive and vain speculations. It may be safely affirmed that theology itself—which is saying a great deal—was never more given to daring and wild speculation than is physical science at the present time. Now, also, that it has become fashionable for scientists to lay before the public in popular lectures the evidences of their specula- tive conclusions, it is certain that many who hear them are quite as good judges of the soundness of their reason- ings as they themselves can possibly be. For logic is one and the same thing in all departments of thought and life. There is not one kind of logic for physical science, another for morals, another for political economy, another for juris- prudence and another for affairs. Hence, as we might ex-— pect, and as we find it in fact, there are no better practical logicians than our ablest men of business. The statesman, the lawyer, the theologian, and the mind that has been well trained in business pursuits, are abundantly competent to judge for themselves whether the proofs adduced in support of such general speculations are conclusive or not. And when we detect in the reasonings upon which they are founded, the most palpable violations of the immutable and universal laws of reasoning, which any intelligent person may often do, as we shall see in the examples which are to follow, we need not hesitate to reject them. But, with respect to the facts established by scientific observation and experiment, the case is altogether different. For here we may well accept in faith and with gratitude those vast and priceless treasures of knowledge with which the discoveries of science are constantly enriching human life. With this preliminary remark we proceed to observe, that it was evidently the intention of Moses here to repre- sent the creation of a real man and woman, and that his THE CREATION OF MAN o7 Adam and Eve are by no means to be regarded as mere typical or ideal beings. No less evident is it that he represents this man and woman as the first that ever existed. or the record treats professedly of the origin of things in order to account for their existence, and with this object in view it would have been absurd in the highest degree that it should pass over in silence the origin of mankind, as it must be understood to do, if these were not the first of their kind. Whatever has been advanced in favor of the existence of pre-Adam- ites is altogether fanciful. For, in any case, there must have been a first man, whensoever and howsoever he may have come into being, and him we might as well call Adam, following the obvious intent of Moses, as by any other name. Also, it lies on the face of this record that only one human pair were originally created, and that from them all mankind have lineally descended ; for it is expressly stated that the name of Eve, which signifies life, was given to the woman “because she was the mother of all living”. And the unity of the race which is here asserted involves some of our most important spiritual interests, such as our universal brotherhood, our duty to love one another as ourselves, our hopes for the elevation of the inferior varie- ties, and even our common capacity of receiving the salva- tion of Christ. Hence it is a matter which stands above the legitimate sphere of scientific speculation, as one con- cerning which Divine revelation has spoken with authority. Yet, in opposition to the truth here revealed, it has been put forth in the name of science, that probably there were several original creations, and that men have spread over the earth from different centres of population. One reason which has been given for this is, that the several varieties of mankind, such as the white man and the negro, are so diverse that they cannot well be supposed to have descended from the same progenitors. But this is a pure speculation, 3% 58 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE and one which is not even plausible, when we consider, that all these varieties within the common species are so identical in life that they intermarry with each other, and that these intermarriages are not only fruitful in them- selves, but they produce a permanently fruitful offspring. Now, if such intermixtures should become general, which evidently is a possible supposition, all these differences would inevitably become obliterated, and what then would become of this argument for the diverse origin of mankind ? In fact, we have no good reason in the present state of our knowledge to doubt but that all these divergences from the original type have been produced, in the course of ages, by the influences of climate, mode of living, social and political circumstances, and other physical, mental and moral conditions. Even the color, lips, hair, and other peculiar features of the lowest varieties are due, as is now generally admitted by scientists themselves, to thousands of years of savage life, and of exposure to the heat of a vertical sun, combined with a great amount of moisture and malaria in the atmosphere—to these and other similar conditions, unmitigated by the influences of civilization and culture and morality upon the intellect, passions and char- acter, and through these upon the features and expression of the countenance. This speculation, somewhat modified, has been advocated also on other grounds. For it has been advanced as probable, that human beings originated simultaneously or otherwise in considerable numbers, as well as in different countries. The late Professor Agassiz was inclined to this opinion. He would have us believe that, as plants and animals—floras and faunas—have their peculiar districts or provinces where they originated, so man is governed by the same law of origin and distribution ; and he designates eight varieties of mankind as having probably originated in communities independently of each other in eight dis- tinct “natural provinces” with their peculiar faunas. But THE CREATION OF MAN 59 this notion rests on no scientific evidence, but on assumed analogies between man and the lower orders of creation. For, since bees and ants must be supposed to have origi- nated in swarms, why not human beings, whose nature is so eminently social, in societies? Also, there are many animals and plants, such as the polar bear and the ostrich, the reindeer-moss and the palm, which cannot live in the same climates, but are strictly confined to their peculiar habitats, faunas and floras; and why should it be other- wise with the varieties of mankind? But it is evident that these analogies do not hold good on the very points on which the inference drawn from them rests. In fact, the resemblances here assumed are palpable differences. For there was a necessity that bees and ants should origi- nate in numbers, because they cannot maintain their exist- ence in single pairs. Their physical constitution, and the propagation of their species, necessitate their existence, from the first, in swarms. But there is no such necessity in the case of man. And though it be true that mere animals, to a certain extent at least, are confined to their peculiar climates, zones, faunas, this is not true of man, who goes everywhere on the earth’s surface, makes a home for himself wherever animal life in any form can exist, lives and multiplies and prospers in all climates and faunas, as well in that of the arctic bear and the sable as in that of the ostrich and the ape. The reason of this is, that human life is elevated far above that of all other creatures into a vastly more free and wide sphere by its peculiar human endowments. Thus we see that these analogies break down precisely where they must hold good in order to raise even a probability of the diverse origin of mankind. “The due consideration of the moral and _ physical nature of man might easily be made to refute all the speculation which has been advanced from the analogy of the animal creation in favor of a separate and independent origin for his several races or yarieties. Jor the mere 60 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE animal by its nature and form is, in a certain sense, attached to the ground; it is incapable of an upright position ; it cannot vary its food; it has no power to adapt itself to new circumstances; it has no knowledge of dis- tant countries; it is of one nature, and that ‘is of the earth, earthy, being destitute of the higher intellectual powers of freedom and morality. Hence there is a fitness that it should be, as it is, subject to laws that are merely physical; that it should be the slave of nature; and that each department of nature, distinguished in its climate and vegetable productions by peculiar adaptations, should have adapted and confined to it peculiar forms of animal life. But man, in virtue of his moral and spiritual nature, is the lord of nature, not its slave, and he finds his highest development and well-being in asserting this control. He is endowed with a nature superior to that of the mere animal; his form is upright, his hands are free, Hence he is subject to other than mere physical laws; he can pro- tect himself from the heat of the tropics, and from the cold of the polar circles; he can vary his food according to the production of each locality; the geometrical ratio of his natural increase makes it necessary that he should spread his tribes away from the place of their origin; and whilst any portion of the earth’s surface remains unsubdued he feeis that his work is incomplete. Hence he justly claims a wider latitude and a freer range over the earth than the mere animal can enjoy, and refuses to be confined within the faunas of the lower orders, which, in fact, are transcended by many species of the animals themselyes.’* Moreover, this speculation of separate and peculiar faunas for the several varieties of mankind is rendered wholly untenable by the well-established results of lin- * See Princeton Review, July 1862, an article on Diversity of Species in the Human Race, by Prof. Chester Dewey, LL. D. but which was re- written and prepared for the press by the author of the present work from papers put into his hands by that eminent naturalist. THE CREATION OF MAN 61 euistic and ethnological science. For it separates, as having originated independently, tribes and peoples whom we know from the underlying unity of their languages and dialects, and, in some cases, from the recorded history of their migrations, to have descended from the same ances- tors. Thus, e. g., there is nothing more certain in physical science than that the Hindoo or Brahman race, the Medes and Persians, the Greek, Latin, Keltic, Slavic and Germanic peoples, with all who have descended from them, innumerable populations which now cover a great part of the earth in all climates and zones, have sprung from ancestors who, in pre-historic times, inhabited the same country, dwelt in the same tents, and pastured the same flocks and herds, far in the wilds of central Asia. The case is precisely similar with all the Semitic or Arabic tribes, nations and peoples. Now, in the light of this one indisputable fact, the speculative notion of separate crea- tions, whether in single pairs or in communities, for the several varieties of mankind is altogether absurd. In fine, it is always unscientific to hypothecate more than one sufficient cause for any effect. Now the effect to be accounted for, in this case, is the peopling of the earth; and for this a single human pair, with any rate of increase which may be assigned, is a sufficient cause. or even in our time population has been known to double itself in a quarter of a century. In the early ages of the world the rate of in- crease may have been, and probably was, much greater from the prodigious length of human life, as recorded by Moses, and from the fertility newly bestowed in the bles-, sing: “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” But even at the above rate the posterity of the first human pair would naturally have been, in less than a thousand years, ten times as great as the highest estimate that has ever been placed upon the population of the globe. This result was prevented, no doubt, by the violence and blood- shed which universally prevailed. 62 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE But sceptical science no longer insists upon any such ob- jections as these, but, with characteristic levity, it is wholly occupied with one which is in flat contradiction to them all, namely, with the now fashionable hypothesis of evolution, to which, therefore, we must give special and patient at- tention, after one or two preliminary observations. Such changes of front with respect to the objections now and formerly urged on scientific grounds to this record, is eminently characteristic of science. For it is essentially progressive and ever advancing to new and unforeseen points of view, from which its previous hypotheses and theories are seen to be incomplete, inadequate, inconsistent with new facts, or, as in many cases, entirely false. Hence we find it strenuously advocating at one time what it as strenuously opposes at another; and the objections which it brings against the Holy Scriptures at one stage of its progress it is almost sure, ata subsequent stage,.to over- throw and trample upon. Of this, evolution affords us another notable example, besides those just referred to. For only a few years ago, it was fashionable among a certain class of scientists to mock at the Mosaic account of the deluge (which has been so wonderfully confirmed by the arrow-head inscriptions) on the ground that the different species of living creatures were so numerous that they never could have found room in Noah’s ark. But now the very same scientists are moving heaven and earth to convince us that there never were any such things as per- manent species, and that all organized beings have been evolved out of a few primordial forms, perhaps from a single one, and that ultimately from inorganic matter. Consequently they have dropped the above objection as a live coal. For since we have no inspired chronology in the Bible, the catastrophe of the flood may be placed as far back in the earth’s history as any one chooses, and, at the time it occurred, the several varieties of land animals may have been, in the process of evolution, so few as to find THE CREATION OF MAN 63 ample accommodation in the ark. Thus it is that science is constantly dealing with her own objections. Hence it is altogether irrational for us, to whom our faith in the word of God is everything, to trouble ourselves about any of her sceptical errors, until we have waited long enough to see whether she herself will not turn against them and correct them, as she has already done in so many cases. We may be sure that we shall not have very long to wait. Meanwhile we need not be very hard upon these rash scientists. For many of them are young men who will erow wiser as they grow older ; and although infidels, with their keen instinct, everywhere welcome and defend ex- treme views of evolution as unanswerable arguments against the truth of the Holy Scriptures, yet all evolutionists are not infidels, nor even sceptics. Some of them make credi- ble professions of faith in Divine revelation, and declare that, as they understand it, they find it entirely consistent with their scientific views. Some are pronounced Theists, whether Christians or not, who earnestly maintain that the forces of nature, by which the processes of evolution are sup- posed to be carried on, are not in any sense the properties of matter, but must be conceived of as the uniform action or energy of the Divine will. Others, whilst regarding these forces as truly the properties of matter, escape the eulf of scepticism by holding also that nothing but a per- sonal or voluntary act of God could have endowed it with these properties. Others still exclude the human soul en- tirely from the hypothesis, and maintain that, for its exist- ence, a creative act of God must be supposed. There are others, however, and unfortunately not a few, who affirm that the forces of nature are the properties of matter in such a sense that it is wholly unscientific to look beyond them— that the question, how it came to be endowed with these properties, is forever excluded from the field of scientific investigation, and from the domain of human knowledge —and that matter with these properties being given, all G4. WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE things may be accounted for and explained. These are the agnostics who attribute to matter nearly all the powers which Theists ascribe to God, and for whom it would seem that materialism and atheism itself are unavoidable. We come now to offer some counter-objections of a strictly scientific or logical character, against this boasted hypothesis of evolution, in so far as it denies the permanence of species in organic nature, and claims that the human race has been evolved out of some pre-existing animal form ; all which stands in avowed opposition to the Mosaic account of the creation of man, and to the statement, so often repeated, that every living creature was made ‘after its kind.’ But in order to this, it is necessary to enter here into some discussion of the essential nature and proper definition of species in organized beings. And, first, the principle of classification, as is well known, lies at the foundation of science, and of human knowledge. Hence we find it everywhere represented in the languages of mankind; for every common term is the name of a class. Now classes are formed by the mental processes of abstraction, comparison and generalization. For whenever we direct our attention to individual objects, we immedi- ately begin, by an instinct of reason, to compare them with each other, and to note their points of resemblance and difference. Those which resemble each other in the ereat- est number of particulars we group together, and thus form our primary or lowest classes. Such a class of individuals is termed a species, which, in organized beings, corresponds to “kind” in the Mosaic record. These primary classes we now compare with each other, noting their points of re- semblance and difference, and group them into classes of classes. Such a class is called a genus. Applying the same process to these higher classes with similar results, when we have carried it as far as possible, we are finally arrested at one highest of all classes, which is that of undifferenced being. The word being, as denoting simply THE CREATION OF MAN ' 65 that which exists, and the word thing, which means whatever can be thought of, are different names for the _ highest class which it is possible to form, unless the latter be regarded as the most comprehensive. Now, among all these classes, and in every branch of science alike, that which bears the name of species, being composed of’ indi- vidual objects having the greatest resemblance to each other, is the most important, because upon it every system _ of classification rests. But here a great difficulty is encountered in determining the limits of species from the fact, that a great number of individual objects, especially in organic nature, are found on inspection of their mutual resemblances to shade off by almost or quite insensible gradations, and even to overlap, so to speak, upon each other. Thus, the Virginia mocking- bird, one of the thrushes, and the most richly endowed of all singing birds, seems to partake of the nature of the hawk ; to a certain extent it is a bird of prey, for, in its wild state, it will kill and eat a sparrow as naturally as does the sparrow-hawk. In addition to this, creatures which bear the- closest resemblance to each other in their outward appearance, are often found to be very different in their inward structure; and those which are most alike both in appearance and structure often differ greatly in their physiological characters,in life, and life’s powers, fac- ulties and manifestations. The Saint Bernard and terrier dogs, e. g., have little outward resemblance, but their life is so nearly or quite identical, that it can be freely propagated between them, and their offspring are also fertile, one with another. On the other hand, the Muscovy and common ducks bear a much stronger resemblance to each other, yet are they so diverse in life that, although it can be propa- gated between them, their offspring is a hybrid or mule, in which consequently the development of life and variation on that line comes to an end. Also it has been often asserted by evolutionists that the Caucasian man of the 66 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE: highest type and the negro of the lowest differ from each other in appearance and structure more than the negro and orang or chimpanzee; but the former are so completely identical in life that it is not only propagated between them with the utmost freedom, but their offspring, one with another, are as fertile as themselves ; whilst the negro and orang are so diverse in life that it cannot be propagated between them at all. Thus it appears that the veiled mystery of life is most salient, and its distinctions most capable of being apprehended, in the phenomena of its reproduction. For these and other all-controlling reasons, our elder naturalists, with hardly an exception, agreed in regarding as subordinate all other points of resemblance and difference for the purpose of determining the limits of species in the organic world, and in attaching a paramount importance to the physiological traits of life’s organs, functions, operations and manifestations. Thus it was that Linneeus, the founder of the modern science of natural history, selected those organs in plants by which their life is propagated, and, neglecting all other resemblances and differences, erected upon them his all-comprehending system of classification. Thus also the naturalists of succeeding times have classified all known organized beings, grouping together in the same species all that were possessed of such a unity of life as that it could be propagated between them in a permanently fruitful form, and, in different species, all between which it could not be so propagated. Not that experiments upon this point were actually made in one case out of a thou- sand, but hybridity was universally regarded as a test of species in this sense, that all organized beings which might be proved capable of propagating, one with another, a per- manently fruitful offspring, should be classed in the same, and all that were incapable of this, in different species. The divergences arising from intermixture and other cir- cumstances among the individuals of the same species were “THE CREATION OF MAN 67 also made the basis of certain fluctuating subdivisions which, with the strictest regard to etymological propriety, were termed varieties. Now these statements furnish us with a definition of species in the organic world which is sharply determinative of the extent and limits of the idea; for thus we see that such species can be nothing else but that unity of life in a group of organized beings, in virtue of which they resem- ble each other, and are normally capable of propagating with each other a permanently fruitful offspring. And this definition was substantially concurred in by all natural- ists, with hardly an exception, until the rise of evolution, as we have it in the following passage from “ the still clas- sical work of Cuvier.” “The birth of organized beings is the greatest mystery of the organic economy and of all nature. ...All or- ganized beings produce similar ones; otherwise, death being the natural consequence of life, their species would not endure.... There is no proof that all the differences _ which now distinguish organized beings are such as might have been produced by circumstances: all that has been advanced upon this subject is hypothetical. Experience seems to show, on the contrary, that, in the actual state of things, varieties are confined within rather narrow limits ; and, so far as we can retrace antiquity, we perceive that these limits were the same as at present. We are obliged, then, to admit of certain forms which, since the origin of things, have been perpetuated without exceeding these lim- its ; and all the beings appertaining to one of these forms constitute what is called a species. Varieties are accidental sub-divisions of species.... Fixed forms which are per- petuated by generation distinguish their species. . . Gen- eration being the only means of ascertaining the limits to which varieties may extend, species should be defined, the reunion of individuals descended one from the other, or 68 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE from common parents, or from such as resemble them as closely as they resemble each other.” * To this should be added from another source: “ Allied species produce between themselves an infertile offspring : remote species of the same genus are those between which hybrids are never produced.” Now it is admitted on all hands, for it is undeniable, that this characterization of species, in which, as has been said, all the elder naturalists are substantially agreed, marks a real and most important distinction in the actual state of things, and represents a vast range of facts in the organic world. or an immense number of organized beings can and do interbreed with each other, producing offspring which are no less fruitful than themselves; and a far greater number either cannot interbreed with each other at all, or their offspring are infertile. Here, then, we raise against evolution the question, ought not the classifications of science to mark, signalize, and emphasize this broad physiological difference between organized beings? Can true science utterly ignore it in her classifications, as if it did not exist? Yet this is just what all evolutionists are obliged to do. The fact, indeed, is so undeniable, and of such vast significance that they cannot help recognizing it from time to time, but the point here made against them is, that in their so-called scientific classifications, the prime object of which is to mark and emphasize resemblances . and differences, they utterly ignore it, as if it did not exist. Is this true science? The hypothesis itself, however, is such that its advocates cannot do otherwise. or it is the assumption that there is no such distinction in permanence ; that, wherever it exists at present, it is the result of circumstances ; that all the differences between existing species have arisen through gradual divergences, in the course of innumerable ages, * Animal Kingdom, edited by Dr. Carpenter. Introduction, pp. 18, 19. THE CREATION OF MAN 69 among the descendants of common parents, which formerly were, and whose offspring may again become, capable of interbreeding with each other. Consequently they spare no pains to eliminate it from their characterization of spe- cies. For although for obvious reasons, they commonly fight shy of precise definitions, yet they explain with suffi- cient clearness the new meaning which they would, if they could, attach to the word. Thus Professor Huxley :* “Tf, in astate of nature, you find any two groups of — living beings which are separated from each other by some . constantly recurring characteristic, I don’t care how slight and trivial, so long as it is defined and constant, and does not depend upon sexual peculiarities, then all naturalists agree in calling them two species; that is what is meant by the word species—that is to say, it is, for the practical naturalist, a mere question of structural differences.” + Now, all this is very curious. Jor by this expression, “a mere question of structural differences,’ he excludes from consideration, in the determination of species, all such as are physiological and biological, in other words, all the phenomena of life, among which, of course, are those of its propagation, which, as we have seen, are the most signifi- cant of all the differences by which organized beings are distinguished from each other. Moreover, thesephenom- ena of life are just those which distinguish living crea- tures as such, the very objects to be classified. - Yet are they to have no weight or consideration whatever in deter- mining the species of such creatures. These are to be classified without regard to that which makes them what *In this discussion, we have preferred to quote from Prof. Huxley, rather than from Herbert Spencer, Darwin, Wallace, and others, because he is acknowledged to be one of the ablest, best known and outspoken of them all, and he sees more clearly than others the difficulties under which the hypothesis labors, and more frankly admits them. Also he repre- sents what he himself has observed and verified, whilst Spencer deals in “glittering generalities,” and with facts as he has learned them mostly from hearsay. t Huxley’s Origin of Species, p. 104. 70 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE they are. This is what evolutionists call science! Also, the statement that “all naturalists agree” in determining species by “any constantly recurring characteristic no mat- ter how slight and trivial,” is as far from the truth as possible. The truth is, that no naturalist, not even Pro- fessor Huxley himself, practically distinguishes species by any such test as this. For it would require him to class the white man and the negro in different species on the- ground of the “constantly recurring characteristic” of their opposite colors. But this neither he nor any other evolutionist pretends to do, for it is excluded by their fundamental hypothesis ; and in the work already referred to, he says explicitly : “J am one who believes [sic] that, at present, there is no evidence whatever for saying that mankind sprang origin- ally from any more than a single pair ; I must say that I cannot see any good ground whatever, or any tenable sort of evidence, for believing that there is more than one species of man.” * He has forgotten the constantly recurring though trivial characteristic of color, by which the white and the black man are distinguished from each other. Thus he finds it impossible to abide by his own characterization of species. In fact, he loses sight of it on almost every page of the work in which it is so formally laid down, and uses the word as including physiological traits, which he has ex- pressly excluded from consideration. Thus, e. g., he says: “Hybrids are crosses between distinct [but allied] species.” How comes it that hybrids are never produced otherwise than between distinct species, if hybridity has nothing to do with the determination of species?” Again: “ Between species, in many cases [remote species] you cannot succeed in obtaining the first cross.” Why so, if the reproduction of life is never considered in separating species from each other ? Once more: “ Here is a feature, then, great or small * Origin of Species, p. 113. THE CREATION OF MAN Te as it may be, which distinguishes natural species.” The fea- ture includes the two facts just stated, and surely it is not an open question, whether it is “great or small.” But, fur- ther, what does he mean by “natural species?” Evidently such as can produce no offspring at all between them, or their offspring are hybrids; and there is no other kind of species, unless evolutionists have discovered some which are unnatural, of which they have not, and probably will not claim the credit. For certainly true science knows nothing of any but natural species, the distinctions between which exist in nature. Here, now, we have on a single page * three examples, taken at random from innumer- able others, in which Professor Huxley recognizes physio- logical distinctions between species, and uses the word precisely as defined by Cuvier and the elder naturalists, except that they had no occasion to put “natural” before it. We sce in these quotations and criticisms the sense which evolutionists, in the interest of their hypothesis, would attach to the word species, and how utterly unable they themselves are to use it in this sense from the opposi- tion which they everywhere encounter in the stubborn facts of nature. We come now to examine the arguments upon which they rely for the overthrow of the old definition of species, and for the establishment of their hypothesis, in the course of which we shall see with what reason Cuvier could say in the words previously quoted: “There is no proof that all the differences which now distinguish organized beings are such as may have been produced by circumstances. All that has been advanced upon this subject is hypotheti- eal.” For these statements are as true now as when put on record by that great man: to the present day all that has been advanced in favor of evolution, as an explanation of the origin of man and of life, is “ hypothetical.” * Huxley’s Origin of Species, p. 107. fey WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE There are but two such arguments, each of which, how- ever, consists of a multitude of particulars. The first of these is the argument from analogy, which is thus stated by Professor Packard :* “Reasoning a priori we assume that organisms, both plant and animal, have been created [developed] cut of pre-existent forms, because it agrees with the general course of nature. All agree that the solar system was evolved ; that the earth was evolved....that the nebular hy poth- esis Is necessary to account for the origin of our earth.” Hence evolutionists assume that plants and animals haye been produced by this process of evolution. In so far, then, as the hypothesis rests upon analogy, it can be no better characterized than it is in these words of one of its advocates, as a mere ‘assumption.’ But this ar- gument includes also the many cases in which organic forms which had been hastily regarded as belonging to different species, have been discovered, upon more perfect knowledge of them, to be mere varieties of the same, as the squirrels of tropical America, e. g-, have been reduced from fifty-nine to twelve species. Evolutionists Jay much stress on such discoveries, as if they indicated that the differences between all species might, conceivably at least, be thus reduced. But here, as in many other cases, their logié is manifestly at fault; for all that such reductions can prove is, that naturalists are liable to error, and have erred, through imperfect knowledge, as was un- avoidable, in classing as of different, what were in truth varieties of the same species. Nor does it matter how many more such discoveries may be made, in so far as evolution is concerned, because whatever definition of spe- cies be adopted, in ten thousand cases for each one of them, it must still and forever remain as impossible to reduce the differences between all organized beings to a * The New York Independent, Feb. 5, 1880. THE CREATION OF MAN 73 unity as it is for the lion to interbreed with the cow, or the mouse with the elephant. But, in addition to this, we must ever bear in mind that this whole argument from analogy, however numerous the particulars it may include, can never, with its utmost logi- cal force, prove that anything is so; the most that it can do is to prove that it may be so, and to raise an antecedent probability in its favor. For it was thus that Leverrier reasoned from many strong analogies to the probability that there was a certain undiscovered planet on the out- skirts of our solar system; but he did not pretend that this was to be received as a truth of science, until he had discovered and could show his planet, Neptune, through his telescope. Upon this evidence from analogy, therefore, whilst scientists may fairly accept evolution as a good working hypothesis, which is full of suggestion, and which may lead, as it has led, to many important discoveries, yet they cannot logically claim for it the character of a scien- tifie truth which others are obliged to accept, and with which all other known truths must be harmonized, until it shall have been demonstrated by proofs of an entirely different character. This, however, they themselves will frankly concede. Accordingly, they bring forward another argument, namely, that the hypothesis will account for, explain, ren- der intelligible a vast number of facts in nature, especially the resemblances and differences between organized beings. These facts are such as the following: The manner in which these differences and resemblances shade off into, and overlap upon each other by almost insensible grada- tions, especially as this has been disclosed by late discoy- eries of fossil remains; the changes which have been observed in organized beings under the influence of circum- stances, such as those by which it is admitted the various races or types of mankind have become distinguished from each other; the origination of new forms in the lapse of 74 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE” ages, and the perishing of such as were ill adapted to, and the preservation of those which were in harmony with, their changing physical conditions and surroundings ; the existence of rudimentary organs—the rudimentary human hand in the whale’s flipper; the male mamme which, according to evolutionists, have been dwarfed, or have fallen into a state of atrophy, by ages of disuse; all the female organs in the male, and all the male organs in the female, in a similar rudimentary or atrophied condition— these are only a few examples of a vast multitude of facts in organic nature which it is claimed that this hypothesis will account for and render intelligible. Now we must admit that this argument, which is strictly inductive in its character, would, if it were without flaw and perfect, be demonstrative; that is to say, if the hypoth- esis were in itself conceivable, and if it would fairly ac- count for all the facts to which it properly applies, and if these facts could be accounted for in no other way, then we should be obliged to accept evolution as a scientific truth, because it would rest on evidence precisely similar and equal to that upon which we receive the Newtonian theory of gravitation. But, unfortunately for its advocates, all these three necessary conditions are wanting, as we now proceed to show In the first place, then, it is not claimed that it will ac- count satisfactorily for all the facts to which it properly applies. It is admitted on all hands that it labors under as yet unsolved difficulties, some of which are of a strictly physical character. Among these is the fact, previously referred to, that individuals of different species can produce either no offspring at all, or their offspring are infertile. For what good reason can be given why the descendants of the same parents should ever come to be normally incapa- ble of continuous propagation with each other. Mr. Darwin, indeed, has endeavored to account for it, but in such a lame and impotent manner that he has not been able - THE CREATION OF MAN 75 to satisfy his brother evolutionists. This, as we shall see directly, is frankly admitted by Professor Huxley. There are also a vast number of other facts, and these the most important of all, namely, the facts of human conscious- ness, of which evolution gives us no rational account. This also is fully admitted by some evolutionists, who, there- fore, exclude these facts and the human soul entirely from their hypothesis, and hold it in application only to the or- ganic world, including the physical nature of man. But the greatest number of its advocates, and all the ablest lo- gicians among them, steadfastly refuse to make this excep- tion ; for they see plainly enough that, if it can be applied to the mental faculties of animals, wonderful as these are, no scientific interest requires that those of men should be ex- cluded. In fact, this exception is made by those only who try in this way to conserve their religious faith. But inasmuch as this objection against the hypothesis, that it does not rationally account for the phenomena of conscious- ness, has been frequently and strongly pressed by others, we need do little more than state it here. Our mental faculties, then, and their operations—reason, sensibility and will—our conceptions of abstract, universal and necessary truths ; our ideas of the true, the beautiful and the good; our moral nature, the distinctions we make between right and wrong ; our capacity of the knowledge of the invisible, supersensual, spiritual world, and, pre- eminently, of God ; our consciousness of freedom, of moral obligation, and of immortality—none of these great salient facts can be accounted for by the operation of the uniform forces of nature, nor by the properties of matter whatever “potentialities” be ascribed to it, nor in any way consist- ently with evolution. Its advocates do, indeed, make spasmodic efforts to explain the phenomena of our moral nature ; but the best they can do is to tell us that our dis- tinctions between right and wrong are nothing but the summation or result of the experiences of good and evil 76 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE through which our ancestors have passed, in the course of innumerable ages, transmitted to us their descendants by the principle or law of heredity ; in other words, that what was in them a distinction based upon their experience be- comes in us, under the operations of this law, a distinction independent of and prior to our experience. In the same way, they strive to account for the operation of animal in- stinct. But in both they signally fail. or it is incredible that bees, ¢. g., which have made no improvement since they first began to be observed, should have learned, by manifold experiments and innumerable failures, how to construct their perfect hexagonal cells, which combine the greatest possible mechanical strength and capacity of contents with the least possible expenditure of material and waste of room : otherwise, their intellectual faculties, for such purposes at least, must be regarded as vastly superior to those of human beings. A similar remark is equally true of the operations of an ant-hill, of the flight of birds of passage, of the un- erring return of the young fish from their wanderings in the ocean to the river or stream where they were spawned and hatched, and of all the phenomena of instinct properly so called. Much more is this explanation inadequate to the phenomena of the conscience in man, the most funda- mental and essential elements of which, namely, its moral character and its authority, it leaves wholly unexplained. For it does not touch our consciousness of moral obligation, which obviously is not contained in, and consequently can- not be derived from, the mere experience of good and evil, however prolonged through innumerable generations. Neither does it touch the authority with which the con- science delivers its sacred. oracles, that “ categorical impera- tive,” the awful impression of which the philosopher Kant could compare to nothing but that of the starry firmament. In fact, this explanation reduces one of the greatest of all mysteries—that of “the voice of God in man”—to a faculty of mere prudential wisdom, to man’s selfish regard for his -. ~~ THE CREATION OF MAN rie own happiness. This is not to account for facts, but to deny, or at least to ignore them. In like manner our sensi- bility to the charms of sublimity and beauty, the admira- tion we feel for an act of noble self-sacrifice, the promptings of great and heroic souls, our indignation at injustice, op- pression and cruelty—all these and other similar facts of consciousness are rationally incomprehensible on the hy- pothesis of our derivation from ape-like animals in which no such susceptibilities have ever appeared. Above all, the phenomena of the human will, especially its freedom, can never be accounted for by the properties of matter, nor from the uniform operation of natural forces, nor in any way consistently with evolution. or, if we know any- thing, it is that the will of man is not subject to the uni- formity of natural laws, and that it is dvroxvyroy, a self-moy- ing, self-directing power. Human life, as depending upon and proceeding from the will, does not run in fixed grooves, like the wheels of a steam-engine. We have the power to choose for ourselves whether we will do right or wrong, which is a freedom absolutely inconceivable as a property of matter, or as a quality of the natural forces. Now in this state of the case, with such an array of most significant facts which evolution does not rationally account for, and with many others which, it is conceded, present as yet unsolved difficulties, the fact, that it does account for a great number of phenomena in organic nature is not suffi- cient evidence to establish it as a scientific truth. For other hypotheses, as is well known, have been maintained on precisely similar grounds, and yet have subsequently been found untenable. In astronomy, e. g., the Ptolemaic or geocentric construction of the solar system was univer- sally accepted for thousands of years, because it accounted for a vast number of celestial phenomena; also the “ Vortices” of Descartes accounted for almost as many of them as the theory of gravitation itself. Yet both of these celebrated hypotheses have long been universally rejected, Lomb WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE and few persons are now aware of what a place in science they formerly occupied. Such, therefore, notwithstanding the number of facts which it is claimed that it will explain, may hereafter be the fate of evolution. Professor Huxley is well aware of this, and prudently hedges himself as follows: “You must understand that I accept it [evolution] pro- visionally, in exactly the same way that I accept any other hypothesis. Men of science do not pledge themselves to creeds... There is not a single belief that it is not a bounden duty with them to hold with a light hand, and to part with cheerfully the moment it is really proved to be contrary to any fact, great or small.” * Yet all this is in palpable contradiction to what imme- diately precedes, for it is difficult to conceive of any words in which he could more emphatically pledge himself to the creed of evolution than as follows : “T think it is Mr. Darwin’s hypothesis or nothing ; that either we must take his view, or look upon the whole of organic nature as an enigma, the meaning of which is wholly hidden froin us.” + But it is very far from being true that “ it is either Mr. Darwin’s hypothesis or nothing.” For, in the second place, all the facts which can be accounted for by evolution, are equally well accounted for on another and totally different hypothesis, namely, that of the distinct and independent creation of species, as defined by Cuvier and the elder naturalists. Evolutionists may be safely challenged to produce a solitary fact which is inconsistent with this latter hypothesis. Certain it is that such a fact they have never yet produced. They contend, indeed, that this view of creation is rendered improbable by many facts, and some of them assert that it is utterly overthrown by late dis- coveries among fossil remains of intermediate forms, which, as they claim, render the transition of one species into * Origin of Species, p. 145. + Ib. p. 144. THE CREATION OF MAN 79 another an easy matter. Thus Professor Huxley, in his New York lectures, ventures to assert that if but one more “missing link” should be discovered, namely, a horse with five toes, “evolution would be demonstrated.” But here again he sets all logic at defiance. For what if this intermediate form were found? Nay, what if any number of such approximations should be discovered, and the structural differences between species should be reduced to a minimum, how could that “demonstrate” that any one species had been actually derived from, or evolved out of another, whilst the bar of their inability to interbreed remains between them, and whilst their closest resem- blances can be fully accounted for on another hypothesis ? How many things bear such resemblances, which yet are not pretended to have sprung one from another? ‘The planets of our solar system are very much alike, but this does not even suggest that Venus has been evolved out of the earth, or Mars out of Jupiter. Such is the logic of evolutionists, by which they “ demonstrate” their hypoth: esis! But, if we concede that either of these hypotheses will equally well account for all the facts in question—which, with the phenomena of human consciousness before us, is a vast concession—there would still remain a logical necessity for an experimentum crucis, a crucial test, that is, a fact verified and established, which could be accounted for by one of them, but not by the other, in order to determine, on scientific evidence, which of them is to be preferred. Now the only such crucial test which is con- ceivable as resulting in favor of evolution is an actual observed and verified transition or transformation of one species into another, such as that of a dog into a cat, or 4 cow into a bison, an ass into a horse, or a chestnut tree into an oak—such a transition, or the development of a new species out of a pre-existing one, so that their mem- bers shall be incapable of crossing breed with each other. 80 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE In order that this hypothesis should rise even to the char- acter of a scientific theory, at least one beast must be ob- served to have become a man, or one animal or one yege- table to have been transformed into another of a different or new species. But no such transformation has ever been known to take place. No evolutionist pretends to have discovered this crucial test. In two or three cases, indeed, doubtful claims have been put forth to the evolution of new species from pre-existing ones among the lowest organisms; but, in all these cases, the species have been distinguished by mere structural divergences, and the question, whether they could interbreed, or not, upon which in this argument everything depends, has never been tested. Professor Huxley has given this sub- ject an extended discussion, in which we shall see more fully that he constantly uses the word species, not in the sense in which he himself has defined it, but altogether as defined by Cuvier and the elder naturalists, and also that his admissions abundantly confirm our previous statements. “We have seen,” he says, “ that breeds, known to have been derived from a common stock by selection, may be as different in their structure from the original stock as spe- cies may be different from each other. But is this true of the physiological characteristics of animals? Do the phys- iological differences of varieties amount in degree to those observed between forms which naturalists call distinct species? [in direct contradiction to what he tells us in his own definition, as previously quoted, that “all naturalists agree” in classing as of distinct species individuals separated by mere structural differences.] This is most important for us to consider... For there is a most singu- lar circumstance in respect to natural species [what other than natural species are known in science and nature?] at least about some of them [no exception has ever been named] and it would be sufficient for the purposes of this argument if it were true of only one of them, but there THE CREATION OF MAN SI is, in fact, a great number of such cases [all without ex- ception |—and that is, that similar as they may be to mere races or breeds [ varieties] they present a marked peculiari- ty in the reproductive process...{[f you take members of two distinct species [again] however similar they may be to each other, and make them breed together, you will find a check... If you cross two such species with each other, then—although you may get offspring in the cross [allied species] yet, if you attempt to breed from the pro- ducts of that crossing, which are called hybrids. . . the result is that, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, you will get no offspring at all... Between species, in many cases, you cannot succeed in obtaining the first cross [remote species]... This is a very extraordinary circumstance. One does not see why it should be [sure enough—no evolutionist can—and here he frankly ad- mits that evolution cannot account for this fact]... Here is a feature, then, great or small as it may be [no small about it] which distinguishes natural species [again] of animals. Can we find any approximation to this in the different races [varieties] known to be produced by select- ive breeding from a common stock? Up to the present time the answer to that question is absolutely a negative one. As far as known at present, there is nothing ap- proximating to this check... Here you see is a physiolo- gical contrast between races [varieties] and natural species [again]... By selective breeding we can produce struc- tural divergences as great as those of species [once more] ‘but we cannot produce equal physiological divergences * ... Mr, Darwin, in order to place his views beyond the reach of all possible assault, ought to be able to demon- strate the possibility of developing from a particular stock by selective breeding two forras which should be unable to cross, one with another, or whose cross-breed offspring should be infertile, one with another... Now it is- ad- * Origin of Species, pp. 104-111. Ax 82 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE mitted on all hands that, at present, so far as experiments have gone, it nas not been found possible to produce this complete physiological divergence ... If you have not done that, you have not shown that you can produce, by the cause assumed [evolution] all the phenomena which you have in nature...If it could be proved, not only that this has not been done, but that it cannot be done [so, by what law of logic does he require us to prove a negative?|... If it could be demonstrated that this is impossible [sic]... I hold Mr. Darwin’s hypothesis would be utterly shattered.” * Now, we have been compelled to leave out much of this lonz-winded discussion, which is loaded with verbiage, as it would seem if it were not for the fatal admissions, for the purpose of disguising difficulties, but we have given in the author’s own words his exact meaning, as any one may see by reference to the pages quoted. Here, then, we have it fully and expressly admitted that the crucial test which the hypothesis of evolution requires has not been discovered, and we are gravely challenged to prove the negative, that its discovery is impossible, as if the burden of proof rested upon its opponents, and not as it does wholly upon its advocates! or, to all intents and _pur- poses, the hypothesis is “utterly shattered” whilst the proof which is admitted to be indispensable to establish it cannot be produced. No, the evolutionists do not pretend to have discovered their crucial test. They tell us that they have not yet had sufficient time, for one such transforma- tion of species may require many thousands or even mil- lions of years. ‘Thus in the words of Professor Jevons : “The deeper differences between plants have been pro- duced by the differentiating action of circumstances during millions of years, so that it would naturally require millions of years to undo this result, and prove experi- * Ib. pp. 140-141, THE CREATION OF MAN 83 mentally that the forms can be approximated together again.” * Here, also, it is fully admitted that the hypothesis is a mere speculation which cannot be experimentally, that is to say, scientifically proved, at least, for millions of years tocome. But give us time enough, they say, and we will show you plenty of such transformations. Well, we will give them all the time they ask, and a million of years hence, when they shall claim to have discovered one such fact in organic nature, we will—examine it. Having now shown that the hypothesis of evolution does not account for a multitude of facts to which it prop- erly applies and that these facts can all be accounted for on an entirely different hypothesis, we come now to demonstrate that the third and final one of the three con- ditions necessary for its establishment as a truth of science, namely, that it should be conceivable in itself, is wholly wanting. For it necessarily involves and implies particu- lars, details, processes of transition or transformation which can, by no possibility, be represented to the mind, of which no conception can be formed, which are abso- lutely unthinkable. Among these are the origin of vege- table life from inorganic, dead matter, that of animal life, with its capacities of pleasure and pain and all its mental faculties, from the vegetable, the transformation of sexless into sexual beings, the separation of the two sexes, pre- viously combined in the same individual, into individuals of either sex alone, the transition of insensible, irrational, involuntary, impersonal, unmoral things into sensible, rational, voluntary, personal, moral beings. Not one of these transformations is conceivable, or thinkable, in the several steps, details, processes which it necessarily implies. Nor is the difficulty lessened, though it is veiled and dis- guised—on the contrary, it is vastly increased—by the * Principles of Science, p. 414. 84 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE immense length of time which is required and allowed for each of them. Especially, with respect to the evolution of sexual out of sexless forms, we have a logical right to ask, what was their condition at each step or stage of the transformation? In what conceivable way could their existence have been preserved, and their species, if species they can be said to have had, propagated, during those hundreds of thousands of years whilst they were neither one thing nor the other, but partly sexual and partly sex- less forms? Let any one undertake to represent to his imagination the procedure and details of what must be supposed to have taken place, and assuredly he will find that they are inconceivable. Again, the separation of the two sexes—what were the several steps and particulars of the process? Whilst that which is now the male was ceasing to bear children ; whilst his mamme, now dwarfed and atrophied by ages of disuse, were ceasing to give suck ; whilst all the other female organs in the male were thus falling into a state of atrophy: in like manner, whilst that which is now the female was beginning to bear sepa- rately ; whilst her bosom was in the process of develop- ment; whilst all the male organs in her body were falling into a similar state of atrophy—whilst these, together with all the other prodigious changes of internal structure and physiological characteristics in both which are necessarily implied, were going on—what then, through all the ages of this transformation, were the physical and mental con- ditions of the creature which is now the male and female man? How was its existence maintained and its spe- cies (?) propagated during those immense periods of time whilst it was neither male nor female, but partly both ? Is it not evident to all men that, before we can be even plausibly required to accept this hypothesis as a truth of science, we have a logical right to demand of its advocates that they shall represent intelligibly all the steps, stages, processes, details, if not those which were actually fol- THE CREATION OF MAN 85 lowed, at least those by which these stupendous trans- formations might possibly or conceivably have taken place? Yet none of them, though they have been often challenged, and though the necessity of it is palpable to all men, have ever dared or attempted to provide us with any such scheme, and this, fur the best of all reasons, because it cannot be done. For all these transformations which have been enumerated, together with innumerable others necessarily involved in the hypothesis, include particulars, procedures, details which no mind can, by any possibility, represent intelligibly to other minds, nor to itself —which are absolutely unthinkable. Now what other refutation of any hypothesis or theory does science require than that, in its particulars, it is unthinkable ? The late lamented Professor Henry, secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, whilst he filled the chair of physics in Princeton College, was always very full and explicit on the nature and uses of physical hypotheses and theories. He took great pains to impress upon his classes that they were very useful for one purpose, namely, in giving direc- tion to experiment and research looking to new discover- ies. Thus he was accustomed to say: “ Young gentlemen, your hypothesis is good for just so many facts or truths to the discovery of which it can lead you. When it will yield you no more discoveries, you have no further use for it—you may throw it away.” Now, agreeably to this view, it is undeniable that evolution has opened new paths of scientific investigation, and led to the discovery of many new facts and truths in the organic world. Neither have we any reason to think that it is yet exhausted. For scientists it may long continue to be a good and fruitful working hypothesis. But, for such reasons as those which have been given, it has no claim whateyer to be regarded as an established truth of science, with which other known truths, especially such as are revealed to our faith in the word of God, must be harmonized. It does not give us 86 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the shadow ofa reason for doubt with respect to the truth of the Mosaic account of the creation of man taken in the most obvious and natural sense of the record. And it is safe to predict that the time is not far distant when this now fashionable hypothesis, as an explanation of the origin of species, and of the Divine mystery of life, will be cast by scientists themselves “to the moles and ihe bats,” with the Ptolemaic system of astronomy, the Vortices ‘of Des- cartes, the notion that nature abhors a vacuum, and other Baconian “ idols of the tribe and the theatre.” IV THE DUPLEX NATURE OF MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrilsthe breath of life, and man became a living soul... God created man in hisown image; in the image of God created He him. Iv has always been perceived that these words could not be limited to the first man, but must apply also to mankind —that what is here treated of is the creation of man as such. For to the question of the catechisms, “ Who created you?” every Christian child is taught to answer, “God.” God creates all men by his almighty power as truly as He created Adam. It is true, the method according to which the thing is done is not the same, being modified by the new conditions introduced in the relations which the child bears to its human parents, but the efficient causality, the creative energy, is the same in both cases. For, as we have seen, the forces of nature are in no sense the proper- ties of matter, but must be conceived of as the acts or energy of the Divine will; and the laws of nature are not powers, but simply the uniform methods according to which God chooses to act in the natural world. If it were not for this uniformity of method in the procreation of chil- dren, it would b> as perfect a miracle as was the creation of the first man. It seems to have been with some insight into this great truth, which lies at the foundation of all true religion, that the mother of mankind exclaimed at the birth of her first-born, “I have gotten a man from the Lord.” The Psalmist also refers to it inthe words of 87 88 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE glowing praise, as follows: “I will praise thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made...Thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb... My substance was not hid from thee when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance yet being unperfect, and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.” The particulars of this statemeut, that ‘God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nos- trils the breath of life, so that he became a living soul,’ are significant of what is no less true of mankind. For the material out of which the human body is now formed is the nourishment supplied to the mother, which, in one form or another, is always produced from the earth; and still that by which man becomes a living soul is the breath of God, as truly as it was in the caseof Adam. The state- ment, therefore, may be understood as representing the truth, that man as such is composed of two distinct natures, the one a material and the other a spiritual sub- stance, in the unity of one personality. For, of course, it is the material part of him which is formed out of. the dust of the ground, and it may fairly be inferred that the breath of God by which he becomes a living soul is in- tended to represent his immaterial, spiritual and moral nature, since no such expression is employed in respect to any of the inferior creatures. This inference, however, does not in the least depend upon the meaning of the word “soul,” which in the Scriptures is often applied to mere animals, but is drawn solely from the fact, that the soul of man exclusively is here represented as the breath of God. The question, whether it is derived immediately from God (creationism) or mediately through the souls of the parents (traducianism) is one of no moral significance in this connection, since, in either case, God is its true author and source. And this distinction between that DUPLEX NATURE OF MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 89 in man which is “of the earth, earthy,” and that which is spiritual and moral, is another great truth of this record, which also lies at the foundation of our holy religion. For each of these two natures in man has its own distinct and peculiar faculties and endowments, which can be distin- guished from those of the other, inasmuch as one class are common to all animals, whilst the other are peculiar to, and manifest themselves in man alone. Thus, at the head, so to speak, of the material nature in man and all other animals, there is a certain faculty of sense, or of knowledge by means of the senses, or of sensual wisdom, which gives all its practical judgments for the guidance of the creature’s life from an earthy point of view, for the gratification of the appetites, passions, desires, affections which have their seat in the body, without any sort of reference to the spiritual and moral world—to the distinction between right and wrong, to immortality, or to God—about which, in fact, it knows and can know nothing. And it seems to be this faculty of earthly and sensual wisdom in man which, when he falls wholly under it, and his life is alto- gether governed by it, is characterized in the Scriptures as “the carnal mind,” “the mind of the flesh,” “the wisdom of man,” “the wisdom of this world,” and by other similar descriptive terms. In like manner, there stands at the head of the endowments of the spiritual nature in man a certain spiritual faculty, whether simple or complex, by which he is rendered capable of the distinction between right and wrong, of moral obligation, and of the knowl- edge of the supersensual and spiritual world, especially, of God and the immortality of the soul. Now the most prominent and striking mode of activity in this faculty is the conscience, which has been often and well called “the voice of God in man,” because it seems to be best compre- hended as the organ through which God reveals his dis- tinctions between good and evil in the forms of right and wrong, commanding the one, and forbidding the other, on — 90 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE his own absolute authority. But, perhaps, the true nature and functions of the conscience may be best illustrated in a figure, as follows: Man is created to be a temple and palace for the indwelling of his Maker—“ Whose house are we”—in which are many beautiful and wonderful compartments. Here, first, is the outer court of the senses, which surrounds the whole building. Crossing this, and penetrating further into the sacred enclosure, we have, on the right hand, the chamber of the intellect, reason, or powers of thought, and on the left, that of the sensibilities and affections. More interior still, communicating with — both these, and through them with the court of the senses, we come to the chamber of the will—the will, which is the steward of the house. Beyond this, in the very centre of the building, we enter a secret chamber, which commu- nicates with all the others, and which is lighted only from above. This is the place of the conscience. Here we behold what seems to be both an altar or shrine and a throne, upon which the light streams down from above, and is reflected with soft radiance through the room. He who sits upon this throne and is worshipped on this altar, being invisible, is “the architect and builder” [rezyirys xat Onwovpyos] of the house; and from this central point He sends forth through all its compartments His oracles of distinction between good and evil in the forms of com- mand and prohibition, for the ordering and government of his household. Such, in a figure, as best we can conceive of it, is the conscience in man, the supreme faculty of his spiritual na- ture. Hence the absolute authority with which it delivers its sacred oracles, which demands implicit, unhesitating submission and obedience, and which can be rationally comprehended no otherwise than as being the authority of God. Hence, also, the feeling of moral obligation with which it binds all the other faculties of the human soul, and of which we are so deeply conscious. The conception DUPLEX NATURE OF MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 91 of this great mystery of our being which we here endeavor to unfold is this: When that which is good in the sight of God is presented to our minds, and we hear the conscience aright, it says to us, This is right ; this thou shalt do; do- ing this it shall be well with thee—thou shalt live: and, when that which is evil in the sight of God is presented, the voice of the conscience, rightly heard, says, This is wrong; this thou shalt not do; doing this it shall not be well with thee—thou shalt surely die. Accordingly we find by experience that, when we are submissive and obedi- ent to this Divinely authoritative direction, it is well with us—we are at peace with God and with ourselves: but when we are disobedient and rebellious, it is not well with us—there is no peace between God and our souls—we are troubled with self-condemnation, shame, remorse and fear. The voice within us gives no further account of itself. Otherwise than by the absolute authority with which it speaks, it does not tell us “ whence it cometh, nor whither it goeth.” Least of all does it afford us any explanation of the reasons upon which its mysterious distinctions between what it commands and what it forbids are grounded. For these reasons, as will more fully appear in the sequel, are such as it is impossible for us with our finite faculties to appreciate—such as none but God himself can comprehend by His all-perfect knowledge of the infinite and eternal dis- tinction between good and evil, and of the infinite series of consequences which flow from all human actions. Here, however, it is by no means claimed that the con- science, in our present fallen state, is an infallible guide. For its heavenly light has been darkened, and its authority, in some sort, dethroned by the entrance of sin into the temple of God. Its sacred oracles, though not wholly drowned by the turmoil and clamor of rebellious appetites and passions, are not now heard with their original fulness and certainty and authority. We are constantly liable to mistake our own wisdom and desires for the voice of God 99 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE in our souls. But in the first man, whilst yet the image of God in his soul remained in all its integrity, and the Divine law written in his heart had not yet been defaced nor obscured by sin, the conscience, surely, must be con- ceived of as giving forth its oracles with a certainty and power which he could not mistake, and as constituting for him an infallible guide and law of distinction between good and evil. In confirmation of this view, we may refer to the analogy of instinct in animals, by which they distin- guish between what is good and what is evil for themselves, prior to experience, and without foresight of the consequen- ces of their actions. Conscience in the first man before he had sinned was the infallible and all-controlling instinet of his spiritual nature, after a manner analogous to that in which animal instinct is yet a sort of conscience in irrational creatures. With respect now to the image or likeness of God in which it is here declared that man was originally created, this declaration has a peculiar fitness and propriety, stand- ing, as it does, at the opening of Divine revelation, inas- much as it sets forth the one fact or condition which makes it possible for God to reveal himself to our minds. For it is an inconceivable thing that He should make himself known to any creature which has in it nothing of His like- ness. It follows'from this, a further reason of which we shall see directly, that these words must be intended to in- clude all mankind, and to declare that they also are created in the image of God ; for this likeness, althouzh it has been defaced and obscured, has not been wholly obliterated by sin. This was clearly perceived by our English translators of the Bible, as appears from their rendering of the Hebrew word, man, in its universal form, notwithstanding, in the original, it has in this place the definite article. Prob- ably they regarded themselves as warranted in this by the fact, that a certain image of God in all men is frequently recognized in the subsequent Scriptures. Thus, in the law DUPLEX NATURE OF MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 93 given to Noah, it is enjoined that the murderer shall be put to death for this reason, that “in the image of God made He man”; where the word still has the article. But evidently this reason has no force, except upon the assump- tion that the murdered person, whoever he might be, was made in the image of God. In the New Testament, also, the unbridled tongue is condemned as that “wherewith curse we men which are made in the similitude of God.” Now the reason why some likeness of God in men is an indispensable condition of His revelation of himself to them, is, that beings which are altogether dissimilar cannot commune with, nor understand each other. This is as- sumed in the reasoning of the apostle John where he says of the Lord : “ We know that we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.” In fact, it is impossible for us to form a conception of anything in God the similitude of which we do not find in ourselves. Whatever there may be in His infinite fulness to which there is nothing in us that in anywise corresponds, must forever remain unknown to us. Hence the names by which we express what we know of His attributes and perfections are universally the names of faculties or qualities in ourselves. Thus, the words, knowledge, wisdom, power, justice, holiness, love, and the like, express ideas which we derive wholly from our own experience. ' For, self-evidently, if we were desti- tute of intelligence, we could not ascribe intelligence to God. This is equally true, though not in all cases so ob- vious, of all other attributes which we ascribe to Him, yet, with this qualification, that we conceive of them in Him as being original, independent, infinite and perfect, whilst that which corresponds to them in us is derived, dependent, finite, and every way imperfect. Hence the image or like- ness of God in man consists in intelligence or reason, In affections or sensibility, and in volition or will, which, in vital union, constitute personality. Here, then, we have God revealed to us as a personal being, which is another of 94 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the fundamental truths of religion. In like manner, the sense of justice in us is the image of justice in God, and so of love, pity, truth, holiness, and all His attributes. Moreover, whatever there is in us is derived from, and is constantly dependent upon, that in God of which it is the image or reflection, sin only, with all its consequences, being excepted. For every thing which has been intro- duced into our nature by sin is derived from a different source, is in the image of Satan, and renders us unlike God. With respect now to this dependence of man upon God, it may be compared to that of a person’s likeness in a mirror upon the person himself. Whilst he stands before the glass, his form and features are reflected in it. The image moves as he moves, and perishes the mo- ment he withdraws himself. Thus it is, in some sort, that the being and attributes of God, mysteriously re- flected, after the manner of the infinite in the finite, become the being and attributes of man. Thus our intelligence, sensibility and will are the reflection of the intelligence, sensibility and will of God. Thus our spirit- ual and moral nature is the reflection of the spiritual and moral nature of God. Justice, holiness, goodness and truth have no existence in us otherwise than as the finite and dependent reflection of that in God which is their original and eternal substance. We are sustained in exist- ence every moment by His power as truly and immediately as the image in a mirror by the presence of him whose reflection it is: and if He should cease to reflect himself in space and time, the whole race of mankind, and the universe itself, would instantly perish, as the figures vanish from the mirrors when the company retires from the thronged hall. In this sense it is written : “ For in Him we live and move and have our being... Who upholdeth all things by the word of His power... And by Him all things consist.” In this comparison, moreover, we discern the transcend- DUPLEX NATURE OF MAM IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 95 ent nature of the being and attributes of God, according as the living person transcends his reflection in a mirror. For God is infinitely above all the ideas or conceptions of Him which we can form. When we have ascribed to Him all conceivable perfections, He is above that which we have imagined Him to be. The largest and noblest mean- ings which we can attach to such words as being, power, wisdom, truth, holiness, justice, goodness and love, are nothing more than index fingers pointing upwards to that in Him which we call by these names. That to which they point remains ever transcendent—infinitely beyond our highest conceptions: “Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfec- tion? Itis high as heaven; what canst thou do? It is deeper than hell [Sheol] what canst thou know?” This is one reason why we are forbidden to represent God under any material image, for such representations can do noth- ing but degrade Him in our eyes. This, also, is one of the truths contained in His great and terrible name, Jeho- yah, which properly signifies, not, Iam that I am, but I am He who is, as if in comparison with Him, being itself could hardly be predicated of any creature. And this was symbolized, though under a pantheistic conception, by the veiled statue of the Egyptian Isis, with its mystical in- scription: “I am all that has been, is, and shall be ; and no mortal has ever lifted my veil.” ‘For God only hath immortality, dwelling in light which no man can approach unto, whom no man hath seen, nor can see, to whom be honor and power everlasting, amen.’ It would seem, then, that the best conception we can form of the image of God in the first man before he had sinned, is that of a reflection from a perfect mirror. It was like that of the starry heavens reflected from the surface of a pure and serene lake, when unruffled by a breath of air, and undefiled by the swollen mountain streams. And in order that the perfection of this image 96 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE should be preserved, it was necessary that man should con- tinue to recognize himself as such a dependent reflection of the being and attributes of his Maker. For the moment he should aspire to an independent, self-originated, self- sustained life and agency, his likeness to God would necessarily be marred, defaced, distorted. This would be, in some sort, as if the reflection in a mirror should assume to itself an independent agency, and should begin to mock and caricature the features and motions of the person from whom it is reflected. In fact, it was just such a breach of moral law and spiritual order which God beheld when man began to act as from himself in violation of the Divine command. For sin consists at bottom in the crea- ture’s losing the sense and recognition of its Creator—in the aspiration to independence of ‘Him in whom it lives and moves and has its being.’ It should be further observed, that the image of God in the spiritual nature of man is again reflected in his ma- terial form. This is evident from the sense of incongruity which is awakened in us by the supposition of a brute nature in a human body, or of a human spirit in the form of any mere animal. Instantly we are conscious of a shocking incongruity. For, in the one case, the form would be a loathsome prison rather than a suitable organ- ism, and, in the other, it would be necessary that the monster should be either chained up or destroyed. Hence the word upright, in reference to the human form, has come to signify in all languages, honest or just—the up- right stature of man being everywhere regarded as an image or symbol of moral uprightness. Hence, also, to stumble and fall means to commit sin. In like manner, the freedom of the human hands and arms, as contrasted with the fore-legs and feet of animals, which are confined to the ground, reflects and represents the freedom of man’s will. In fine, his clear and lofty eye, adapted to looking upwards rather than downwards, symbolizes his capacity +8 tr“ ieee. ere: = DUPLEX NATURE OF MAN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 97 for the knowledge of spiritual and Divine things—the knowledge of God, immortality and heaven. Hence the ever-memorable words of the Roman poet. * The full and constant recognition of the transcendent nature of the being and attributes of God is our only effect- ual safe-guard against anthropomorphism, which is the attempt to attain unto God by bringing Him down to us. For this is an error to which all men are prone, and one which is hardly less common now among Christians than it was among the Greeks, when St. Paul preached against it in Athens. ‘T’oo often we think of God as altogether such a one as are we ourselves: “Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such a one as thyself.” Too often we forget that He is incomprehensible—in all His modes of being and attributes as far above the loftiest flight of our thoughts as the firmament is above the reach of our arms—tran- scending all our conceptions, as the person of a man tran- scends his likeness reflected in a mirror. It is in this sense He declares: “ My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord: foras the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.” The most perfect conceptions we can form of Him are altogether inadequate, being derived from the dependent and now distorted reflection in us, and not from the all-perfect and eternal substance in Him. Moreover, it is only in pres- ence of the Incomprehensible that our minds are hum- bled and subdued to faith. The Infinite alone can we * Pronaque cum spectent animalia cetera terram, Os homini sublime dedit, eeelumque tueri Jussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus. Whilst, in their forms and in their nature prone, All other creatures look upon the ground, Feature and form sublime to man He gave, And bade him look with steady eyes to heaven. Ovid. Met. 1. 2. 98 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE truly reverence and adore. As the object of our worship, God must be regarded as transcendently above the noblest conceptions that we can form of His attributes and pertec- tions, | Vv THE TEMPTATION IN THE GARDEN OF EDEN The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed. And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food—the tree of life, also, in the midst of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil—thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. .. Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made: and he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every -tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die, for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. THE infidel Voltaire, in his ribald way, has somewhere observed that the “story of the garden of Eden only shows how much the God of Jews and Christians cares for his apples, and how little for his children.” Now the mis- understanding of the record which is evinced by this blasphemous remark is hardly more gross and inexcus- able than that which has generally prevailed among Christians themselves, For it has been commonly sup- posed that this forbidden tree was placed in the primal abode of our first parents as a trial of their faith and obedience, to prove them, whether they would obey, or not, by giving them a ready occasion for disobedience, if 99 100 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE they should choose to avail themselves of it. But this notion is never once alluded to in the Scriptures, nor are there any rational grounds for it. On the contrary, these two trees in the midst of the garden were, by their pro- found symbolical* significance, as we must now undertake * The symbolical character of the historical transactions connected with the garden of Eden is evinced by such considerations as the follow- ing: 1. The analogy of other scriptural narratives, such as that of the brazen serpent in the wilderness. 2. The significance of the names of per- sons and things, such as those of “the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” which are similar to the tree of liberty, the castle of indolence, the palace of desire; for if language be not here used at random, the names of these two trees must be interpreted as symbols under which something pertaining to lifeand tothe knowledge of good andeyil is represented. 38. The universality of the things here treated of ; the creation of man from the dust of the ground, the distinction of sex, the temptation and sin of man, shame, the pains of childbirth, labor, sorrow and death. These things areco-extensive with the human race; but if we have nothing here but a literal narrative concerning Adam and Eve, it gives us no information of the origin of these things in mankind, Hence, in the words of President Edwards: ‘ There is scarcely a word, that we have any account of, which God ever said to Adam or Eve but which does manifestly include their posterity in the meaning and design of it.” And, with certain obvious qualifications, this is equally true of what is said about them, of their own words and actions, and of the cir- cumstances in which they were placed. 4. A symbolical meaning is fre- quently drawn from these events by the Lord and His apostles, as in His prohibition of divorce at the pleasure of the husband: “ Have ye not read that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh ? Wherefore, they are no more twain, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined together let not man put asunder.’”’ Now, however valid this may have been as a reason why Adam should not divorce Eve, it cannot be made to apply to other men except by regarding it asa sacred symbol under which God has declared His will with respect to marriage in general. Also, St. Paul argues from the fact, that ‘Adam was first formed, then Eve,” and that she “ was first in the transgression,” that woman as such is not to usurp authority over her husband. But evidently this reasoning has no force except upon the assumption that the order in which the first man and woman were created and fell into sin was asymbolical transaction. For otherwise this sequence, though it might be a good reason why Eve should not usurp authority over Adam, would be no reason at all why other women should be put under the same law. It would seem that this evi- dence of the symbolical character of these transactions leaves nothing to desire, although we shall find it abundantly confirmed by the analysis given in the text of the symbols themselves. THE TEMPTATION IN PARADISE 101 to show, Divinely adapted to guard and conserve man’s innocence and happiness ; in other words, they were placed in the garden to represent and to impress upon his mind and heart, those very truths by which alone was it possible that he should be kept from sinning, and should continue in that holy and blessed state wherein he was created. For this “garden of the Lord,” or paradise of delight, with its beautiful trees and spontaneous flowers and fruits, was not only a place of abode perfectly adapted to the simplicity and innocence of the first human pair, but also it constituted a most vivid image or symbol of their inward and spiritual life. And in order that it might serve this purpose with respect to the deepest mysteries of their moral and spiritual nature, these two trees were placed in the midst of it, both, as it would seem, equally fair to the eye and fruitful; the fruit of one apparently as good for food as that of the other; yet carefully distinguished by different significant names, and by the fact, that of the one they were allowed to eat, whilst the other was solemnly prohibited under the penalty of death. What, then, we must inquire here, are the great truths which these two symbolical trees were intended and adapted to signify to the minds of our first parents and to all their posterity ? Especially, what was and is eternally forbidden to man in the prohibition which God laid upon the tree of the knowl- edge of good and evil? This is the fundamental question, upon the solution of which all rational understanding. of this mysterious transaction depends. In order to solve it, we must here take into consideration the necessity under which man, even in his estate of inno- cence, must have been placed, for an infallible guidance, in order that it should continue to be well with him. For, whatever conceivably might have been his circumstances, even though there had. been no forbidden tree in his paradise, yet his life must necessarily have been passed between two worlds of good and evil, inasmuch as this is a 102 WISDOM OF IIOLY SCRIPTURE condition which no creature can, by any possibility, escape, because it results from the obvious fact, that all good things have their opposites, which must be evil. Thus, if truth, justice, temperance, to love God and our neighbor, food and exercise, be good for us, then falsehood, injustice, in- temperance, to hate God ane our Hoehne idleness and poison, must be evil for us; it is not ee that it should be otherwise. And these two worlds of good and evil between which every one’s life must be passed are practically infinite. For every human action has its effects and consequences, both upon its subject and object, to which no limits can be assigned, which naturally run on forever. Especially does every thought, affection, volition and action exert a reflex influence upon its subject, and render him, to some extent at least, a different being from what he was before. Every indulgence in narcotics or intoxicants tends, as is well known, to strengthen the appetite which craves them, enfeebles the power of resist- ance to the temptation, and renders their victim more prone to such indulgences. ‘The confirmed drunkard and opium- eater, how changed, how fallen from what they once were! On the other hand, by every act of relieving the necessi- ties of the poor and suffering, or of Christian sympathy and liberality in any other form, our disposition to sym- pathy, charity and liberality is developed and strengthened. Thus, by the exercise of pure and holy affections we become more pure and holy; by impurity we become more impure. Moreover, the changes which are thus wrought in our characters necessarily affect all our subse- quent agency, rendering it, with all its results, different from what it would otherwise have been. Hence the effects and consequences of our actions naturally run on accumulating forever—are practically infinite. All this, indeed, is so insensible that commonly we think little about it, yet is it inevitable as are the results of any physi- cal law. It is like the incessant dropping of water, which THE TEMPTATION IN PARADISE 103 seems to produce no effect, but by which, in time, the whole rock is worn away. In fine, because the effects and consequences of our moral agency are thus infinite, they cannot be comprehended, nor predicted, nor foreseen by our finite faculties, so that, in view of them, it is impossible for us to choose aright between good and evil. As a mat- ter of universal experience, they turn out to be different from what we anticipate. That which seems to us evil to do, or to suffer, often produces the most blessed fruits, and that which seems most desirable is often fraught with measureless evil: to all which it must be added, that both the good and evil fruits of our actions become known to us only through experience, after the actions themselves have been performed, and can never be recalled. Now, all this must have been just as true of the first man before he had sinned as it is for us, because it is a necessary condition of finite intelligence. It was as impos- sible for him to foresee the infinite consequences of good or evil which would flow from his actions as it is for us. Hence it always was, and is, and forever must be, impos- sible for man to distinguish and choose aright between good and evil by his own prudential wisdom. Left to his own guidance, the first man would not only have been liable to error,* but he would have been under a fatal necessity of mistaking, at some time, through mere defect of knowledge, evil for good, and thus, from the infinite consequences of such a mistake, of bringing himself under the endless dominion of evil. Hence he could not be, and was not, left to the guidance of his own prudential wis- dom ; but, as we must conceive of him from the moment of his creation, he was placed under the infallible direction of the wisdom of God in his conscience, to govern his every act of discernment and choice, as the lower animals * Both the Hebrew word NNT and the Greek dwapria, sin, primarily signify an error, mistake, blunder. 104 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE are directed by their unerring instincts. For howsoever this Divine guidance may have been revealed to him, whether by inward monitions, or oral commandments, as in the case of the forbidden tree, it must have reached and taken effect in his conscience, whose function it was, as we have seen, to hear the voice of God in his soul. Thus we see that there were certain great truths which needed to be indelibly impressed upon the minds and hearts of our first parents, in order to the possibility of their continuing in their original estate of innocence and bliss, namely: (1) That their lives, even in paradise, must be passed, and their every act must be a choice, between two worlds of good and evil: (2) That, for the purpose of right discrimination between these two worlds, they could not rely upon their own prudential wisdom, but must hold themselves, in every choice and act, implicitly submissive and obedient to the authority of the wisdom of God in their consciences, which marked that which was good for them to choose and do as right, and commanded it, and which stigmatized the evil as wrong, and prohibited it: (3) That, if they should cease to heed the sacred oracle of God in their bosoms, and undertake to guide themselves by their own shortsighted and fallible insights and reason- ings—the moment they should set up their own prudential wisdom as their: guide and law of distinction and choice between good and evil, and should choose what might seem good in their own eyes, instead of what was good in the. eyes of God, as enjoined upon them in their consciences— they could not fail to choose amiss, evil for good, nor to plunge themselves into the world of evil. Now, by what conceivable means could these truths be most vividly represented to their minds, and most power- fully impressed upon their hearts? This was the problem which God seems to haye placed before His mind from the moment of their creation, and which He solved, according to His all-perfect wisdom, in the arrangement of the two THE TEMPTATION IN PARADISE 105 symbolical trees in the midst of their paradisiacal abode, the significance of which remains to be considered. With respect to the forbidden tree, its symbolical mean- ing would have been more obvious if its name had been correctly rendered in the English version of the Scriptures, and in accordance with similar expressions wherever they occur. For of the child that should be born of a virgin, it is said: ‘“ Butter and honey shall he eat [he shall be nourished with the choicest spiritual food] that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the good: for before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.” Now this passage evidently refers to early child- hood, whilst the moral nature is yet undeveloped, and the voice of the conscience distinguishing between right and wrong is not yet heard. Again, with respect to the en- trance of the children of Israel into the promised land, it is said: ‘ Your children, which in that day had no knowl- edge between good and evil—they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.’ Now the Hebrew words in the name of this tree which are translated “the knowledge of good and evil” are precisely the same with those which are here properly rendered “knowledge between good and evil.” Beyond a question, their meaning is the same in both places ; whence we see that the real name of this tree was, “ the tree of the knowl- edge between good and evil.” This was clearly perceived by _ Augustine, who expressly says that it “ was named the tree of the science of distinguishing between [dignoscendi] good and evil.” These two symbolical trees, then, in that they stood in the midst of man’s life-sphere, and in that one of them was allowed and the other was prohibited to his eating, repre- sented the truth, that his life must necessarily be passed, and his every act must be a discrimination and choice, be- tween things allowed and things forbidden, that is, between 5* 106 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the two worlds of good and evil. In that they were equally fair to the eye, and, to all appearance, equally good for food, but more especially, in that it was the tree of the knowledge between good and evil which was prohibited upon the penalty of death, they represented the truth, that he could not distinguish between good and evil by his own prudential wisdom, that he was prohibited from all at- tempts to do so, and that, the moment he should attempt it, he would inevitably subject himself to the sum of all evils. The tree of life, in that it was so named, and he was al- lowed to eat of its fruit, represented the truth, that his life of innocence, holiness and happiness would be perennially nourished and conserved by his constantly choosing and doing that which was marked for him as right and good and commanded by the wisdom and authority of God in his conscience. In fine, that no reasons were given him why one tree was allowed and the other forbidden, repre- sented the truth, that God’s distinctions between good and evil were grounded upon reasons which it was impossible for him tocomprehend or appreciate, which could not be revealed to his finite understanding, which he must not attempt to bring under the test of his own reasoning, insight, or foresight, but must hold himself, in every choice and act, implicitly submissive and obedient to the commards and prohibitions of his Divine guide. Thus interpreted, according to the best ascertained laws of symbolic representation, these two trees must be recog- nized as the two holy sacraments of the primeval church. For in their general character and object, they correspond, in the closest manner, to the two sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, which our Saviour, with his perfect knowledge of our spiritual wants, ordained in the Christian church to represent and seal upon our hearts the great and fundamental truths of his gospel by which we live. Not at all, therefore, were they placed in the midst of man’s primitive abode to prove him, whether he would THE TEMPTATION IN PARADISE 107 obey, or not, nor as a ready occasion or temptation to dis- obedience—God forbid!—but to represent in sensible form, and to impress upon his mind and heart, the truths of his spiritual life, as means indispensable and Divinely adapted to the safe-guard of his innocence and happiness. And whether he discerned the full significance of this grand symbolic representation, or not, in the nature of things, he must have been deeply sensible to its broad and general impression, just as Christians are powerfully im- pressed by the sacraments of the church, even when they comprehend but a little of their unfathomable meaning. Thus we see that the love of God for his redeemed people beams forth from thesacrament of the holy supper with hardly greater effulgence or splendor than does his fatherly tender- ness for his first human children from these two symbolic trees in the midst of their earthly paradise. For without them, the sin and fall of man would not only have been possible, as it must have been in any case, but it would have been inevitable, just as where the Christian sacraments are rejected, there the precious truths which they represent and are intended to seal upon men’s hearts soon become in- operative, and finally perish out of their minds. We are now prepared to understand in a rational way the nature of the temptation under which man sinned and fell. And reserving all discussion of the tempter for a future study, we may notice here that he addressed. himself to the woman apart from her husband, for what reason we are not informed, but probably with a subtle forecast which was fully justified by the result, that she would be- come his pliant and efficient instrument for the seduction of her husband. However this may be, it is of much vreater importance far us to abserye, that his representa- tions concerning the Diyine prohibition took effect in her mind, and awakened corresponding thoughts and senti- ments. This is evident from the fact, that she believed him, and that his temptation was successful. By his sub- 108 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE tle power, he seems to have spoken his words into her very soul, so that these, as they appear on the record, no less than her own words, must be taken as expressing what passed in her experience. This has been well expressed as follows: “The old serpent deceived our race, and poisoned its root, by that well-chosen temptation addressed to our first parents: Ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil. He seems to have spoken the word into their very souls, so that it became a part of their being.” He begins, then, with questioning the Divine prohibi- tion: “ Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” This question, interpreted by the He- brew idiom which it contains, properly signifies: Is there, indeed, any tree in the garden of which God has forbidden you to eat? His words took effect in the woman’s mind, and became in her a sceptical questioning of the prohibi- tion, which was the commencement of her bosom sin. For there was no occasion for it, nor does it matter to what it applied. It may be that the prohibition had made too feeble an impression upon her memory, so that a doubt began to arise, whether, indeed, it had ever been given ; for some such forgetfulness seems to be implied in the words of her subsequent attempt to excuse her transgres- sion: “The serpent beguiled me [literally, caused me to forget], and I did eat.” But this was sin; for in that the command had been given, it was the thing which ought to have been remembered, whatever else might be forgot- ten. Ora doubt may have arisen in her mind, whether she had understood it aright ; dnd this was sin, for when God speaks, He means to be understood, and whoever does not understand Him must either accuse Him of not speak- ing with sufficient plainness, or convict himself of not hearing as he ought to hear. Or this questioning may have applied, as somewhere in the temptation, no doubt, it did, to the reasons for which such a mysterious prohibition had been laid upon them : Why has God forbidden us to THE TEMPTATION IN PARADISE 109 eat of this beautiful tree? If there is any harm in it, why has He not told us what it is? for what reason has He placed us under this authoritative law which renders no account to us of the grounds of its mysterious distinctions ? Now all such questioning, in so far as it implies reluctance or hesitation to obey, is sin. Jor thereby man cites the wisdom of God to the bar of his own wisdom, and requires it to give account of itself before that inferior tribunal, which, as we have seen, it cannot do, because God’s dis- tinctions are grounded upon His incommunicable knowl- edge of the essential and eternal difference and opposition between good and evil, and of the infinite series of effects and consequences which flow from moral actions, which, in the nature of the case, it is impossible for the finite mind to comprehend. Hence the Word or Wisdom of God, howsoever He reveals Himself, must “speak with authority, and not as the scribes.” . The reply of the woman: ‘ We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden, but of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die” —these words are not to be understood as adding anything to the Divine pro- hibition, but simply as re-affirming it in its certainty and rigor. ‘They represent a reaction in the mind of the woman against her sceptical doubts, and a re-affirmation of the command in her conscience. For such re-affirmation of its authoritative deliverances is all that can be obtained from the conscience by whatever questions it may be pressed. From questioning the tempter proceeds to impudent denial of the truth and sincesity of God, and to a slander- ous charge of malice against Him, which he sustains by a plausible, but wholly false interpretation of the symbolical name of the forbidden tree. “Ye shall not surely die [ye shall not die at all], for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be 110 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE as God knowing good and evil.” The sense of these words also entered into the woman, and must be taken as representing the progress of her own thoughts and desires. But here, again, a fundamental question arises, namely, what precisely was the object of desire, or the benefit, which the tempter set before her mind in these words, as an inducement to violate the Divine prohibition? This question requires to be the niore carefully elucidated because it is obscured by certain difficulties of interpre- tation. For it has commonly been supposed that this object of desire was the experimental knowledge of evil, in distine- tion from good. But this cannot possibly be the true meaning of the tempter’s words, which require to be ren- dered, Ye shall be as [or like] God, knowing good and evil. or everywhere else in this record, the same He- brew word O°72N, though plural in form, is translated in the singular, because it is always the subject of a singular verb. Probably it was not so rendered here in English with reference to the subsequent words of God: “ Behold, the man is beeome as one of us to know good and evil.* But this expression, as all interpreters agree, does not imply a plurality of Gods, and, consequently, cannot justify the translation of the word in the plural here. Now it is utterly inconceivable that either the woman or her husband should become, in any sense, more like God by the experi- mental knowledge of evil, for God certainly has no such experience. In no intelligible sense, was man rendered more like God by sinning against Him than he was before; but, in every way, he was made more unlike Him; for sin it was, and nothing else, which mutilated and shattered that image or likeness of his Maker in which he had been created. No less. inconceivable is it that the experimental knowledge of evil, which is precisely the same thing as to * For the evidence that these words are ironical, see pp. 208-214 ———— - " , THE TEMPTATION IN PARADISE 111 suffer it, should be an object of desire to any rational being. Thus interpreted, the tempter’s words, instead of being a solicitation by the promise of a benefit, become a palpable warning or threat, that, if she should eat of the tree, she should surely suffer for it. In fine, these words represent the knowledge of good, no less than of evil, as the object to be obtained by eating of the fruit of this tree, and to limit this knowledge to evil alone is not to interpret, but to pervert them. In fact, this notion is one of those miser- able errors which, by their extensive prevalence, have covered this whole subject with almost impenetrable dark- ness. But, now, if we bear in mind what has been already determined, with respect to the impossibility of the finite mind’s distinguishing between good and evil by its own wisdom, we shall have no difficulty in understanding what that object of desire and aspiration on the part of the woman was for the attainment of which the tempter represents to her that she might venture to transgress even the command of her Maker. “ Ye shall be as God know- ing [discerning between] good and evil,” he says; the meaning of which plainly is, If you will eat of the fruit of this mysterious tree, instead of incurring death, or any evil, as God has falsely declared that you shall, the eyes of your understandings shall be opened, as he knew that they would, and as the name of the tree itself signifies, so that you will be enabled infallibly to discern and choose be- tween good and evil for yourselves by your own wis- dom. Thus you will obtainemancipation from your pres- ent blind and slavish dependence upon Him for guid- ance and direction, in which He seeks to hold you by forbidding you to eat of this goodly tree: you will become independent of Him in thought and life, yea, equal to Him in that you will be a law unto yourselves, and will hold your welfare and happiness absolutely and forever in your own. hands, 112 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE The woman believed these slanderous and malignant lies. They entered into her soul, and reproduced them- selves in her experience. For when she saw that the wisdom of God would not condescend to justify itself at the bar of her wisdom, which, as we have seen, it could not do, she lost faith in it, and began to ascribe falsehood, intentional deceit and evil motives to her Maker. She said in her heart: We shall not die at all by eating of the fruit of this tree. God has deceived us with malignant intent to hold us in slavish dependence upon himself, and in subjection to His arbitrary will. For here in the fruit of this beautiful tree, as its name indicates, and as God knew when He prohibited it, there is contained such a potent virtue that, as soon as we shall eat of it, our eyes shall be opened, and we shall become equal to God in our ability to discern and choose between good and evil for ourselves by our own wisdom. Thus we shall obtain com- plete emancipation from our blind dependence upon the authority of God’s laws, which render no reasons for their commands or prohibitions, but only thunder death to the transgressor. Here, then, the light of faith in God, by which hitherto she had seen all things through His eyes, so to speak, went out, and dark, horrible, Godless un- belief entered, by which she was thrown back upon her own short-sighted and erring wisdom for the guidance of her life. Vi THE ORIGINAL SIN And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make her wise, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat, and she gaye also to her husband with her, and he did eat. Tire bosom sin which had already been generated in the heart of our first mother under the subtle temptation of the adversary could not fail to go forth and consummate itself in the corresponding outward act of transgression. For her sense of sight was now captivated by the beauty of the tree loaded with its ripe fruit. Her sense of taste also was excited by the anticipated pleasure of eating what she thought must be more delicious food than any she had ever tasted. And for these gratifications of her earthly and sensual nature, she was now ready to cast off finally and forever the wisdom and commands of God as the guide and law of her life. But, above all, the tree was one to be desired to make her wise, in what sense we have already seen. For by the potent virtue of its fruit, she would obtain, as she had been deluded to believe, an in- telligent and unerring insight into the nature of good and evil, so that she could choose between them for herself by her own wisdom. And, oh, how blessed and glorious would it be for her thus to achieve complete deliverance from the necessity of walking and living by faith in another, even though that other were God himself, and to secure forever an independent and infallible wisdom and way and will of her own! How delightful to walk and live by sight, instead of by faith, and yet never err from 1138 114 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the path of her own welfare and happiness! She hesi- tated no longer: Her rash hand in evil hour Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she ate. Earth felt the wound, and nature from her seat Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe, That all was lost. Thus the will in the mother of mankind, the centre and substance of her personality, turned away its face finally from the authoritative wisdom of God, and yielding to the solicitations, put itself under the law, of her earthly and sensual nature. Jor in the very act of disobedience, she chose what seemed good in her own eyes, and rejected what had been marked as good for her by the command of God. Thus she consummated her bosom sin of questioning * doubt and unbelief. The sin of the woman was immediately reflected and re- produced in her husband. St. Paul, indeed, informs us that ‘‘ Adam was not deceived, but the woman being de- ceived was in the transgression.” His meaning may be no more than that he was not first deceived, and that she was first in the transgression. Or it may be that the under- standing of the man was not imposed upon by the sophism which was employed by the tempter, and which, in the light of the preceding discussion, it is easy to detect and char- acterize. for it was what is called in logic the petitio prineipri, or begging the question, in which the conclusion to be proved is covertly assumed. This becomes evident when we consider that the tempter, in proposing to the woman the ability to discriminate between good and eyil as the benefit which she would obtain by eating of the for- bidden tree, admitted that this was a power which she did not then possess. But he carefully slurred over the point, that, in the very act of eating contrary to the Divine com- mand, she must necessarily choose by her own wisdom, as —— THE ORIGINAL SIN 115 if she were already in possession of this power : in other words, in order to obtain what she desired, she must act upon the assumption that she already possessed it. Now it may be that Adam was not deceived by this transparent sophism, and did not anticipate any such result from eating of the forbidden tree, but followed his wife in the trans- eression from the strength of connubial affection, because he could not bear to separate his destiny from hers. This was Milton’s understanding of the transaction : He scrupled not to eat, Against his better knowledge ; not deceived, But fondly overcome with female charm. Earth trembled ... and nature gave a second groan, Sky lowered, and, muttering thunder, some sad drops Wept at completing of the mortal sin Original. However this may be, it is certain that the sin of the man was the same in substance with that of the woman, as it was consummated in the same outward act. For in eating of the forbidden tree, she chose between good and evil by the light and wisdom of her earthly nature ; and it was by this nature that he was united to her in marriage, as appears from the emphasis placed upon the words, “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. ...They twain shall, be one flesh,” as, also, from the fact, that this union is dissolved by death, so that the sur- vivor is at liberty to contract another marriage. Adam, therefore, in allowing himself to be led by the suggestions and influence of his wife to transgress the Divine com- mand, yielded to the solicitations, and followed the guid- ance, of the same earthly nature in him. Thus his will, also, the centre and heart of his personality, turned its face away from the oracle of God, and put itself in subjection to his earthly and carnal nature. Thus it was, as here represented, that, by eating of the forbidden tree, and by the states of mind and heart therein 116 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE implied, man ceased to recognize himself as an image of God, and ceased to reflect God’s distinctions between good and evil. Thus he lost faith in God—in His truth, good- ness, love and wisdom—and charged his Maker with deceit and malice. He ceased to prefer the wisdom and will of God to his own, and set up the light of his earthly nature as his criterion and law of discernment and choice be- tween good and evil. Thus he repudiated the authority of God over him and undertook to be a God to himself. He said in his heart, as the tempter had said before, “ I will be like the Most High.” And he carried his sin to the utmost extreme of impiety by profaning the holy sac- rament which his Heavenly Father had set up in the bosom of his daily life to nourish and develop his spiritual nature, and as the safeguard of his innocence and happi- ness. He sinned as the beloved disciple would have done, if, whilst he leaned upon the bosom of his Lord, instead of receiving the offered bread and wine, he had dashed them upon the ground, and trampled them under his feet. Thus the mind in man became “ the carnal mind,” and his will “ the will of the flesh.” Thus the mind and will of the flesh now became the criterion of his discernment and choice between good and evil—the supreme law of his life. If, now, by the insight and reasonings of his own creature wisdom, he could not comprehend the reasons upon which God’s commands were grounded, he would not submit to them, nor obey them. If he could not see how a thing would be good for him, or what good would result from it, he would not choose nor do it simply for the reason that it was marked as good and commanded by the wisdom and authority of God. If he could not see how a thing would be evil for him, or what evil would result from it, he would not eschew it simply because it was stig- matized as evil and forbidden by the wisdom and authority of God. Thus, also, man became immersed in the world of illusion—became ‘subject to vanity.’ For looking now THE ORIGINAL SIN 117 at all things through the eyes of his earthly nature— of that wisdom which gave all its practical judgments from the earthly point of view—he could see nothing but earthly and perishable things. He lost perception of the unreal and shadowy nature of the phantoms of time and sense. The things which are invisible and spiritual, which only have substantial and eternal reality, became dim and shadowy and uncertain ; truth and error were in- volved in indistinguishable confusion. He was baptized into the great Satanic lie, by which the things of God have ever since been perverted—into the image of the father of lies. Viewed under the figure previously assumed, the will in man now became self-will, and, leaving the stew- ard’s office in this house of God, he entered the sacred chamber of the Divine presence, and seated himself upon God’s altar and throne; whence he began to issue his authoritative mandates to the household, as if he had been the conscience itself. Thus the chamber of knowledge be- came filled with doleful errors, delusions and chimeras ; the chamber of the affections with inordinate desires, unclean and monstrous passions ; and, in the outer hall of sensation, the appetites became as swine in their stye. It will be observed that, in this representation of the first sin, no attempt is made at a philosophical ex- planation of the origin of evil; and that, for the best of reasons. For how it was possible for a holy nature to pass out of its original holiness into sin, is, and must for- ever remain, a mystery inscrutable to our minds. In order to comprehend it, we must be able to discern the primal natures or essences of good and evil, which, as we have seen, is impossible to all finite intelligence. Consequently, for every creature that God has made, the origin of evil is an eternally insoluble problem. Indeed, it has been well observed by Neander that “ to explain evil is to justify it.” The demonstration which has been given of, the impossi- bility of the quadrature of the circle is not a whit more 118 - WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE conclusive than that which might be given of the insolu- bility of this problem. The principal difference is, that, by the aid of the symbols employed in mathematical analysis, the logic in the one case is more easily mastered than in that of the other. Happy are they, beset with a specula- tive mind, who learn this, and cease to vex themselves with a question by which they must be eternally baffled. Now, in confirmation of the preceding views, we would be happy indeed, if we could refer to all the ablest inter- preters of Scripture who have ever treated of the subject. — Tt must be conceded, however, that this cannot be done. For, in a somewhat extensive course of reading with this object in view, we have been able to discover but one author whose authority can be fairly cited ; but he, as all will admit, was one of the greatest minds the world has ever seen, namely, Lord Bacon, the father of modern science. In his various writings, he frequently alludes to the Scriptural account of the fall, showing that he had made it a special study, and always in the sense of the following quotations: ‘ Man, when he was tempted, before he fell, had offered unto him this suggestion, that he should be like God: but how? not simply, but in this part, knowing good and evil... It was an aspiring desire in man to attain to the proud knowledge which defineth of good and eyil, with an intent to depend no more upon the commandments and prohibitions of God, but upon him- self and his own light, and to give law unto himself as a god, which was the original temptation.” * Here we have the whole matter in a nutshell, from which no one can fail to see that it was understood by this great man precisely as it has now been explained. But such confirmation is hardly needed. For we have abundant evidence, in addi- tion to that which appears on its face, of the soundness of this interpretation, in the flood of light which it pours * The latter of these quotations is taken from two passages in Lord Bacon’s*Works, Vol. I, pp. 82, 162. ‘ nd el een belo — THE ORIGINAL SIN 119 upon the nature of sin, upon the way of salvation by faith, and, indeed, upon the whole subsequent revelation. To these points we must now give some brief attention. Here, then, in this first transgression we have set forth in symbol or diagram the primal root and inmost essence of all sin, as consisting in the aspiration and attempt of the creature to possess and to exercise that incommunicable attribute and power of God by which He alone is able to discern and choose between good and evil by His own wisdom. But this aspiration in man must not be limited to the self-conscious operations of his mind. for the children of Adam, being propagated subsequently to his sin and fall, are born, as it would seem, in his moral like- ness, with a moral nature out of which there springs up spontaneously, as poison under the serpent’s tongue, the preference of their own wisdom and will, of what seems good in their own eyes, to the wisdom and will of God, to what is good in his sight. This inherited self-conceit, self- trust, self-assertion is the original corruption or pravity of man’s spiritual nature, and the substance, principle and root of that which in form, development and growth, be- comes in all men that self-conscious and active preference of their own wisdom and will to the wisdom and will of God in which all sin consists. There is, however, as from the symbolical character of this whole record we might anticipate, a beautiful similitude or reflection of paradisiac innocence in the infancy and childhood of human beings, which has been characterised by Lord Bacon as “the sparkle of the purity of man’s first estate.’ For during this period the Adam is yet undeveloped. The infant knows nothing of right or wrong, good or evil. By his own voluntary act he has not yet eaten of the forbidden tree—has not yet assumed to be a law unto himself. With instinctive and implicit faith he still hangs upon his mother, and feels himself to be safe and happy in her arms. In the most charming 120 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE similitude of innocence he now dwells in paradise, free from shame, toil and sorrow, where all his wants are supplied without his foresight or care, where all nature blooms out on his opening senses, and where every sense is filled with delight. In this state, he is one of those little ones of whom St. Paul tells us that they “ have not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression,” and concerning whom our Lord declares that “of such is the kingdom of heaven.” But, in the natural development of every human child, apart from grace, there comes a time when he begins to question the wisdom and authority of his parents as the law of distinction between good and evil for him, and to assert a wisdom and choice and will of his own. Uncon- sciously at first, consciously afterwards, his questionings spontaneously arise: Is not this food, or this amusement, or this mode of dress good for him—adapted to give him pleasure? He can see no harm in it. Why, then, is it prohibited? He can see no reason for it. For, being ignorant of what his parents know of good and evil, be- cause he is without their experience, it seems to him that their commands and prohibitions are not based upon good and sufficient reasons; consequently that it is harsh and arbitrary in them to hold him under an authority which will not condescend to justify itself in his eyes. And, now, having begun to question and doubt the wisdom and love of his parents, he is ready to impute toe them un- worthy motives: They love to govern him; they take pleasure in making him do what is disagreeable and irk- some. ‘Thus he sets up his own wisdom and will against: theirs as his law of distinction and choice between good and evil; thus he begins to eat of the forbidden tree. Nor let it be supposed that such mental processes are too subtle for the minds of very young children ; for although they may not come up into clear consciousness, nor find expression in words, yet the substance of all this must =e ae THE ORIGINAL SIN 491 evidently be in every child before he can proceed to any outward act of disobedience. In the meantime, the law of God has made its appear- ance in the consciousness of the child, commanding and forbidding with the voice of absolute authority, 7. e., with- out any explanation of the reasons upon which its myste- rious. distinctions are grounded. Whence this new law and authority over him who has already lost faith in, and cast off that of his parents? He does not believe in it. Because he cannot know what God knows concern- ing good and evil, nor comprehend the infinite series of effects and consequences which will flow from his actions, he will not believe that the things which God commands or forbids are good or evil for him. Hence he disobeys and rebels. He will follow his own judgment in choosing between good and evil. In this way, that which has already taken place in respect to his parents and their - law, naturally repeats itself in respect to God and His law ; that in him which has already asserted independence of the authority of his parents now asserts for itself in- dependence of the authority of God. Thus he sets up his own wisdom and will against the wisdom and will of God as his guide and law of distinction and choice between good and evil, and thereby perfects his transgression of eating of the forbidden tree. Neither shall he die at all. He fully believes that he is competent to walk by his own light, to be a law unto himself. Consciously or unconsciously, in spirit, if not in processes of thought, in substance, if not in the precise forms here represented, all this must precede every known and voluntary transgression of the Divine law. More deadly still does all this become when the length and breadth and searching spirituality of this law is re- vealed to the sinner. When he learns -that it forbids, not only outward acts, but also appetites, desires and other affections, the most secret thoughts, dispositions of heart, and states of mind, what he has long felt and now loves 122 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE to feel, and what does not seem to be subject to his own control—and _ these, under the direst penalties, “the worm that never dies,’ and “the fire that never shall be quenched,”—then, apart from grace, it naturally seems to him that God deals with him in the most tyrannical and cruel manner. What! has He created me with these desires, and will He damn me because they burn? He has given me reason, and forbids me to use it! He com- mands me to exercise faith and love towards Him when faith and love are not in my own power! Here the carnal mind becomes enmity against God. The sinner would dethrone God if he could. The law in its spirit- uality and power awakens into life and activity the sin [@uaprt¢a]| which before lay dead, or comparatively inactive in his soul, and he dies the death in trespasses and sins. We have here the meaning of those words of St. Paul which have been so much misunderstood: “ I was alive once without the law; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died... For without the law sin was dead. .. The strength of sin is the law.” It is true, indeed, that the faith of Christ in the parents, and working through them in a thousand effectual ways upon their children, does often restrain the Adamic nature from rushing into such wild excess, even where the chil- dren are not the subjects of regenerating and sanctifying grace. ‘To many, also, even in Christian countries, the Divine law never comes with such revelation of its spirit- ual exactions as to call into full activity this slumbering enmity against God; and, with respect to the heathen, being without the law, except as an uncertain and con- fused echo of it may be heard in their consciences, they cannot come under its unmitigated condemnation. But the root or germ of all this is in every child of Adam; and it is in consequence of this that ‘death reigns over all, even those who know not the law, and have not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression.’ THE ORIGINAL SIN 123 Not unfrequently, however, the development of the Adam in children is facilitated and hastened, rather than repressed, by parental treatment and influence. For whilst the child hangs upon his parents in conscious dependence and instinctive faith, they are to him in the place of God, and his filial subjection and obedience to them are or- dained to educate and prepare him for filial subjection and obedience to his Heavenly Father. The grand object of the parental law and authority is, that it may pre- figure and usher in the law of God, as springing from His incomprehensible wisdom and unfathomable love, and as representing His authority. When it fails to serve this purpose it is an utter failure. Consequently no pains should be spared to train up the child in the obedience of implicit faith and filial love, as opposed to that of sight and reasoning. By all possible means, his mind should be imbued with the conviction that his own wisdom can never be an adequate or safe guide for him to follow in the distinction and choice between good and evil, and that he must ever be implicitly submissive and obedient to an authority above him, the reasons of whose commands and prohibitions he can never comprehend, whose wisdom and love he must never question or doubt, and that thus only can it be well with him, either in this life or in that which is to come. And when the spirit of questioning and disobedience begins to manifest itself, the parents, as we see in this record of the original sin, ought simply and affectionately, yet with all solemnity and emphasis, to re- affirm their commands, but by no means to attempt any explanation of the reasons upon which they are grounded. For the best reason, and perhaps the only one that should ever be given, for a child’s obedience, is, that his parents, in the superiority of their wisdom, in the fulness of their love, and in the plenitude of their authority, have given him a command. Yet he should be subject to the fewest possible restraints. He should have the free range of his 124 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE native paradise... And every command should be given with the gentlest voice and manner, in the fewest and simplest words. But for every transgression of a known command, and for nothing else, chastisement should be administered with all tenderness, yet with unswerving fidelity. This is the wisdom of God for the training of children; and woe to the age and world which have found for themselves another wisdom! But instead of this, nothing is more common than for parents to argue with their children, endeavoring to make - them comprehend the reasons for which they are required to do anything, that they may be led to see that it is good, and may choose it for themselves. Now this is to assume the truth of the original Satanic lie, that, if the matter be properly explained to them, they are capable of discerning and choosing between good and evil by their own wisdom. For the wisdom of the parent can no more justify itself to the child’s mind than the wisdom of God could justify itself to the minds of His first human children. Hence, whenever such an appeal is made to the reason or judg- ment of the child to sanction a parental command, that judgment, if it be honest, is always liable to go against the command ; in which case, the parent is reduced to the ne- cessity, Shee of allowing the child to do as he pleases, or of flying from, the pidemeat to which he himself has ap- pealed. Often parents are amazed and confounded at what seems to them the stupidity or perverseness of their children, because, after the matter has been fully explained to them, they are not at all convinced, but desire to do what is forbidden just as much as before. But the stu- pidity is in the parents: woe to them, and unto their chil- dren, and unto their children’s children, to the third and fourth generation, that it is! For thus they stand to their children in the place of the original tempter. They lead them up to the forbidden tree, show them its fruit, so fair to the eye and good for food, and so desirable to make THE ORIGINAL SIN 125 them wise, and invite them to pluck and eat—to do that which expels them from their beautiful paradise of sim- plicity, innocence and happiness, and sends them forth into a world full of thorns and thistles—to do that which works death in their souls. For when the law of God, which cannot give its reasons, comes to the child, it finds him already trained to regard his own wisdom as adequate to his discernment between good and evil; it finds him al- ready in rebellion against the authority of the law. Alas for the child! Through the influence of his parents, he has sinned and fallen before he has come to know that there is any right or wrong, or any God. And ‘woe unto the world because of the offences which are thus committed against the Lord’s little ones!’ The view which has now been presented of the genesis, nature and propagation of sin is further and strongly con- firmed by the flood of light which it pours upon the whole subsequent Scripture. Of this, however, we can give here only a few examples. Here, then, in the first place, we see why such vast im- portance was attached to parental authority and training in the covenant which God made with Abraham, in which it was the prescribed means for the realization and fulfil- ment of the covenant promises. We have this stated in the words of God as follows: “ For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after’ him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.” Also, this view enables us to comprehend the deep significance which is every- where in the Word ascribed to disobedience of parents, namely, because it is the first stage in the development of the original sin; because it is rebellion against God in germ. For this reason, in the decalogue, it is classed with idolatry, adultery and murder, and prohibited, with the promise of long life to filial reverence and obedience: and 125 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE hence, when it became incorrigible, it was punished, under the Mosaic law, with death by stoning. Again, we have here exhibited in a new light the nature, object and necessity of the moral law, as revealed in the Scriptures. For in this law God sets forth His distinctions between what is good and what is evil for man. He does not make anything either good or evil by simply commanding or forbidding it. In the moral law, as dis- tinguished from positive and temporary enactments, He commands only what is good in itself, was good before, and would have been good, if He had never commanded it. He forbids nothing but what is evil in itself, was evil before, and would have been evil, if He had never forbidden it. Now this ‘holy and just and good law,’ having been originally written upon the heart of man, was necessarily defaced and obscured by sin, so that his conscience no longer gave forth its oracles of distinction between good and evil with its former certainty, fulness and authority. In man’s fallen state, the clamor of rebellious appetite and passion confuses the voice of God in his soul, so that he is ever liable to mistake evil for good, and good for evil. Hence, in order that salvation from sin should be possible, a necessity arose that God should reveal the moral law in anew and absolutely perfect outward form, that by its distinctions everything claiming to be a deliverance of the conscience might be tested, and that so an infallible direc- tion and guidance for human life might be recovered. Moreover, we see here why sincere obedience to the law of God, or true piety, is everywhere in the Word identified with wisdom, and sin with folly—why the good man is always the wise man, and the sinner a fool. For even the worst of sins—idolatry, incest and murder—are characterised as foolishness, and no more criminal charge is ever brought against any man than that “he hath wrought folly in Israel.’ And the reason of this becomes evident, when we consider that wisdom, properly defined, is the practical THE ORIGINAL SIN 127 choice of that which is good for the chooser himself; and folly, similarly defined, is the practical choice of that which is evil for the chooser himself: when we consider, also, that, for the choice of good, and the eschewing of evil, the wisdom of God is the only infallible criterion and guide. Hence it follows, that he who governs himself by this wisdom chooses what is good for himself, and he who departs from it, and puts himself under the guidance of his own wisdom, chooses, of necessity, what does harm to himself. Now this identification between piety and wisdom, and between sin and folly, stands out in the whole word of God, and is the general theme of the book of Proverbs, running through all the amazing variety of its ‘sacred apothegms, as a golden thread through a necklace of pearls; nor is it possible fully to appreciate any one of them without reference to this leading idea which gives unity to them all. Thus, in the first chapter and else- where, with almost endless repetition: “ The fear of the Lord is the beginning [literally, the principle] of knowl- edge... The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wis- dom, and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. _..Be not wise in thine own eyes:..Lean not to thine own understanding... Fools despise wisdom and instruction... The prosperity of fools shall de- stroy them... They lay wait for their own blood ; they lurk privily for their own lives.” This identification is found, also, upon the old Egyptian monuments, in the hieroglyphical records of that wisdom in which Moses was educated, and which probably was derived from a primitive revelation ; for there the sign which is always translated “the wicked” is that of a man breaking his own head with an axe. In like manner, sin is identified with pride, and piety with humility, or meekness, which commonly signifies that state of mind which 1s submissive and obedient to the Divine commands; and it is in this sense we are to understand the words: “The meek shall inherit 128 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the land,’ and those in which it is said that “the man Moses was very mage, above all the men which were upon the face of the Lol On the other hand, “ the proud ” and “scorners” invariably signify the Aisohedince the wicked. The reason of all this is, that the pious have not, and the wicked have, such a proud conceit of their own wisdom, as a sufficient guide and law of distinction between good and evil, that the former do, and the latter do not, humble themselves to believe in, and submit to, the distinction which God gives them in his authoritative commands and prohibitions. In fine, we see here why it is that, in God’s way of sal- vation, everything is made to turn upon faith. For Scrip- tural faith necessarily implies in man the renunciation of his own wisdom as folly—of what seems good in his own eyes—and the adoption in its place of the wisdom of God —of what is good in His sight—as this is revealed in Christ. He who truly believes receives Christ as the Lord of his reason, affections and will, of his heart and con- science, of his whole life. By this faith he is assured that all things are as Christ represents them; that what He commands is good, and only good, and what He forbids is evil,and only evil, for himself and all mankind. The question of all truth for him is, not what he thinks, but what Christ thinks. The question of all practical conduct is, not what seems good or evil to him—not what he ap- proves or disapproves, desires or does not desire—but, simply, what his Lord has commanded or forbidden. And, by the same principle, his heart is governed in all his rela- tions to the Divine ‘providence ; so that, according to the strength of his faith, he has no mind or will of his own; in their place to him are the mind and will of his Lord. He no longer judges of anything by his own wisdom, which he recognizes as perfect folly, but looks at all things, so to speak, through the eyes of his Lord, whose wisdom he cordially receives as the supreme law of his discernment => < ~. ~ el THE ORIGINAL SIN 129 and choice between good and evil. With his Lord’s reasons, whether in the requirements of the law, the obligations of grace, or the dispensations of Providence, he instinctively feels that he has nothing to do; that his whole duty is that of filial submission and obedience ; in which he enjoys the sweetest assurance that all things shall be made to work together for his good. Thus the words of St. Paul are fulfilled in him: “If any man thinketh himself to be wise, let him become a fool that he may be wise:” and those other words by the prophet concerning the Lord himself: “ Who is blind as my Servant? or deaf as my Messenger that I sent? Who is blind as He that is perfect? or blind as the Lord’s Servant?... He shall not judge after the sight of His own eyes, nor reprove after the hearing of His ownears; but with right- eousness shall He judge.” Thus it is, and not otherwise, that man recovers what was lost in the fall. It should be observed, in conclusion, that this view of the original sin is contained substantially in most of the traditions concerning it which have been preserved among the heathen. As a single example, according to the Greek mythology, the sin of the first man consisted in an attempt which he had made to ascend into heaven to steal the fire, i. e. the light or wisdom of the gods. For his punish- ment, a woman was created and bestowed upon him. She was endowed with every female perfection. Venus gave her beauty, with all irresistible attractions, and filled her heart with the desire of pleasing. The god of eloquence touched her lips with persuasion. Apollo taught her music. Minerva instructed her in all useful arts. The Hours and the Graces decked her with every winning ornament. Each of the deities conferred upon her some precious gift. Last of ali, Zeus placed in her hand a mystical casket, enjoining upon her, under the most terrible penalties, never to open it. Thus endowed, she was presented to her hus- band. But, overcome in evil hour by the desire of forbid- 6* 130 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE den knowledge, she broke the seal of the fatal casket, and forth flew from within all the cares, sorrows and mala- dies of human life. Too late she tried to close it, but in vain. Hope alone remained at the bottom, which she carefully preserved and handed down to her posterity, now all she had to leave them.* Dimmed and obscured, in- deed, it is, yet it reflects the nature of the original sin. It isa far-off echo of the mournful truth, sounding across the abysm of ages, through the toil and sorrow and death which have universally prevailed, pitiful as the wail of the young mother over her dead child, not without the hope that, though it be dead, it shall live again. * See Hesiod, Theog. 521, and Opera et Dies, 47. vil THE TEMPTER Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. . . . And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field: upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her Seed. He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel. Accorprna to the bare literal sense of this record, the tempter of the first human beings was a serpent or snake, and nothing more. But this loathsome rep- tile is the chosen Scriptural symbol of the great spirit- ual adversary of God and man, as we find it elsewhere and in the words of St. John: “That old serpent which is the devil and Satan.” Hence there is no room for doubt but that it was he who, under the form of a serpent, exercised the subtle malignity of his nature in the primal temptation. Nor does the curse subsequently pronounced upon the creature, as the instrument of Satan, imply that its form, motions, or habits were different before from what they have been ever since. For the judgment of labor upon man does not imply that he had previously lived in idleness. On the contrary, it is expressly stated that he was placed in the garden,of Eden “to dress it and to keep it.” Nor do the sorrows of parturition inflicted on the woman imply that in a state of innocence she would never have borne children. The more probable view of such matters is, that those conditions of nature 131 132 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE which otherwise would have been productive of no incon- venience, became punishments or chastisements in conse- quence of sin. We may reasonably understand, then, that it was the serpent, as we know it now, which was chosen by the tempter as his instrument for the purpose of reflecting his own moral character in place of the image of God in man. In this choice he may have been guided by his native subtlety, discerning that, of all crea- tures, this one constituted the most perfect symbol of him- self; or, which is more probable, this whole transaction may have been overruled by the good providence of God for the instruction of mankind in all subsequent ages. With respect to the subtlety which is here ascribed to the serpent, it belongs to the animal mind, that sensual wisdom with which the earthly nature, both in man and in the inferior creatures, is endowed. The most prominent characteristics of this earthly mind, are, as we have seen, that it is incapable of the distinction between right and wrong, and of the knowledge of the spiritual world, and that it gives all its practical judgments from the earthly point of view, solely for the gratification of the appetites, passions and other affections of the material nature at whose head it stands. In mere animals, however, it is not an evil, but a good. In fact, it is the supreme excellence of all those creatures which have no moral nature, unless instinct be placed above it. It is only when subtlety is predicated of moral beings that the word is used in a bad sense. We do not call him a subtle, crafty, or cunning person in whose character truth, justice, fidelity are the most prominent traits; in whom this calculating and selfish craft is held in subjection to the laws of moral obligation ; whose prudential wisdom is informed, subdued and controlled by the authority of God’s commands. This is not subtlety, but wisdom, in the Scriptural and noblest sense of the word. It is not a little strange, how- ever, that of all animals, the serpent should be represented EEE THE TEMPTER Los as the most highly endowed with this sensual wisdom. But we know that mysterious attributes and powers have always and everywhere been ascribed to it, in consequence of which serpent-worship has prevailed, at one time or another, over nearly or quite the whole world; nor has it ever been satisfactorily explained how the creature has been able to make such a deep and universal impression upon the human mind. Perhaps, when science shall have solved this problem, there will be nothing surprising in the manner in which it is here characterized. But we find other qualities and conditions in this reptile which, although apparently inconsistent, are, in fact, closely connected with the quality here ascribed to it. Jor it is the most gluttonous of all creatures. In the words of an eminent naturalist: “These frightful creatures are vora- cious above all others, and happy is it for mankind that their voracity is often their punishment ;” for the nature of which this sensual wisdom is the head knows no law but the gratification of its own greedy appetites and pas- sions. Also, the serpent grovels upon its belly, with its eyes nearly level with the ground, so that it can see only the shortest distance ahead: for subtlety is a grovelling quality, and ever short-sighted withal.. The only far- sighted wisdom is that of instinct in animals, and that of conscience in man. Again, the serpent moves forwards to its object, not in a straight or direct line but by oblique, complicated and tortuous involutions and evolutions of its body; in allusion to which, as also to the preceding case, we have the following from Lord Bacon: “We take cunning to be a sinister or crooked wisdom.... These windings or crooked courses are the goings of the serpent, which -goeth basely on the belly, and not on feet.” More- over, the serpent alone, of all creatures, has a double tongue, which, in all ages among all nations, has been taken as the most expressive symbol of malignant false- hood and deceit. In fine, in its typical species, its mouth 134 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE is full of deadly poison, which it ever seeks, by means of its fatal fangs, to inject into “the blood which is the life” of all other creatures. For it is the mortal enemy of everything that lives and breathes, especially of man, and naturally man is its enemy. The object of its worship, doubtless, has been to propitiate and avert its malignant power. Such, then, was the creature in which the great spiritual adversary of God and man became incarnate, in order to effect his diabolical purpose, being led to make this choice, either by the overruling providence of God, or by his own subtlety, because he found in the form, motions, character and conditions of this reptile the only suitable and ade- quate symbol of his own fallen and ruined nature. And this symbol is full of instruction for all mankind. For it teaches us that the wisdom of Satan is subtlety: in other words, he does not hold himself in any wise amenable to the direct, straight, authoritative guidance of the wisdom of God—he has no conscience—but relies wholly upon his own prudential faculties to discriminate and choose between what is good and what is evil for himself. He is incapable of looking upwards with reverence to that which is above him—to anything that is true or pure or beautiful or holy. The only views which he can take of such things excite his enmity and malignity. He looks at all things solely from the earthly point of view, and reaches all his practical judgments by the tortuous invo- lutions and evolutions of his own subtlety. He is of an infinitely base and grovelling nature, whose meat and drink it is to have his own selfish way, and to do his own malignant will—ravenous and greedy beyond conception for the gratification of the lowest, most filthy and abom- inable lusts; chief among which is his lust of torment— a raging desire to inflict suffering and misery upon all other creatures, into whose life he is ever seeking to inject that deadly poison of deceit and falsehood of which his THE TEMPTER 135 own mouth is full: “ When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own, for he isa liar and the father of it....He was a murderer from the beginning.” He wages impla- cable warfare: against everything above him, especially against God and against God’s image in man, under whose bruised heel he thereby places his own head to be crushed. Consequently, he is ever short-sighted. He overreaches himself in everything that he does, frustrates his own purposes and objects, and brings upon his own head the evil which he seeks to inflict upon others. He is wise only to do evil to others and to himself, which is the perfection of folly. Here, then, we have symbolically represented the serpent- like character of the spiritual tempter of man; and these ideas are still further developed in the malediction pro- nounced upon the creature for its agency in the temptation, upon its seed, and upon the adversary who became in- carnate in it in order to effect his diabolical object. In fact, this malediction must be interpreted as a Divine sym- bol of even more profound significance than any other of the series, inasmuch as it contains a glorious prophecy of the ultimate triumph of good over evil in this world, and a reference to the incarnation and sacrifice of the Lord, by which this triumph should be achieved. For as the ser- pent is the symbol of Satan, so the seed of the serpent represents Satan’s image or likeness in man; and the Seed of the woman includes all her posterity with special reference to Him who was born of a virgin, and who suffered on the cross all the rage and malice of the ad- versary. The serpent-like malice of Satan, together with the shortsighted folly of his wisdom or subtlety, are strikingly exhibited and copiously illustrated in his whole Scriptural history. For he was certainly prompted in his temptation of our first parents by his enmity against mankind, which enmity, it should be observed, did not originate from this 136 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE malediction ; and his folly is exemplified in the fact, that he thereby brought himself under the wrath and curse of God, placed his own head under the heel of the Seed of the woman to be crushed, and opened the way for such revelations of the grace and whole character of God as otherwise would have been impossible. Thus he more than frustrated his own purposes and objects. Also, by his temptation of Job he succeeded only in perfecting the spiritual life of the patriarch, in promoting his more abundant temporal prosperity, and in furnishing the ma- terials for a book of the most sublime revelations, which has been the source of unspeakable consolation to God’s tempted and afflicted people, and of instruction in the mysteries of Divine providence, in all subsequent ages. In like manner, in his temptation of the great Seed of the woman, he suffered an ignominious defeat, and caused Him to pass through that experience which was indispensable to His perfection as a succorer and Savior cf tempted and afflicted souls. Even in his greatest achievement, in which he tempted Judas to betray, and the Jews to crucify the Lord of glory, he made himself the instrument of exalt- ing the object of his enmity above every creature, of placing the government of the universe upon His shoulder, and of laying the only foundation which could be laid for the salvation of mankind. Thus, where, doubtless, he thought he had obtained a final victory, he ensured the object which he aimed to defeat, and destroyed his own power. For Christ suffered “ that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” We see the same thing in his persecutions of the primitive Christians, in which ‘the blood of the martyrs became the seed of the church,’ and in all other manifestations of his enmity against the Seed of the woman ; and we shall yet see, as the final result, that ‘he shall be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, THE TEMPTER 137 where he shall be tormented day and night forever and ever—in everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels,’ But this powerful symbol represents, not only the curse of the adversary himself, but also that of his seed, the serpent in man. For it is in this sense that the Scribes and Pharisees are called a “ generation of vipers,” “children of the devil,” and Elymas the sorcerer is addressed in the words: “O full of all subtlety and mischief, thou child of _ the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?” In all the particulars in which the symbol characterizes Satan him- self, it characterizes also his seed. For the head of the serpent in man is this same subtlety, which being essentially “earthly,” as belonging to his animal nature, becomes, when exalted into the place of the wisdom of God as the guide and law of discernment between good and evil, both “sensual and devilish.” It is true, indeed, that by the light of this wisdom man may atta to the knowledge of earthly things, and may possess himself of the perish- able wealth of this world, but, when he falls wholly under it, the light of spiritual life in his soul goes out in Egyptian darkness, he becomes blind to spiritual things, and he loses the imperishable treasures of heayen. Speak to him now of the beauty or glory of meekness under insult, of love to his enemies, of returning good for evil, or of self-sacri- fice in any form, and he knows not what you mean. Show him any one who follows the example of Christ, spending his time, wealth, strength, and perhaps his life for others’ good, and all that he sees is a hypocrite, a fanatic, or a fool. Lead him to the cross of Calvary, and he will exclaim : “He saved others, himself He cannot save.... Let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe.” And if, in the last depths of this spiritual blindness, you speak to him of right and wrong, God or spirit, he will answer, as thousands are now doing: “I cannot see, nor 138 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE hear, nor feel, nor taste, nor smell God, nor spirit, nor right, nor wrong. “There is no God.” Heis a phantom of the imagination, created by fear. There is no right nor wrong but pleasure and pain. Thus, under the law of this serpentine wisdom, the spiritual nature of man loses its power to stand and walk uprightly, it falls over into a prone and crawling motion, with its face to the ground. On his belly the man goes, and eats dirt, all the days of his miserable life. He feeds upon the bread of deceit, envy, pride, vanity, lust and malignity. He is given over to a reprobate mind to work all uncleanness with greediness. Evil he calls good, and good evil. His mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. The poison of asps is under his tongue. Thus theimage of God in man is replaced by the image of Satan. But that which is most wonderful and prodigious in all this is the fierce enmity of the seed of the serpent against the Seed of the woman. For all history is full of it. Even before the Lotd came into the world, His holy proph- ets and most devoted people “had trial of cruel mock- ings and scourgings.... They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheep-skins and goat-skins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented....Of whom the world was not worthy.” When He appeared in all the tran- scendent beauty and glory of His person and character, clothed with immaculate innocence and purity, the fulness of His Divine life overflowing in streams of compassion and love for all mankind, how unspeakably shameful was the treatment He received! His stupendous miracles of benevolence and healing, which they could not deny, they ascribed to “ Beélzebub, the prince of the devils.” Those whom He came to save reviled Him, spit upon Him, scourged Him, and finally crucified Him between two thieves. And His followers in the first ages—how were they treated? What is the meaning of the martyrology a THE TEMPTER 139 of the church? What prompted a Roman emperor to light the public gardens with living Christians smeared over with pitch and set on fire? Whence the delight of the Roman populace when they beheld them torn in pieces by wild beasts in the amphitheatre? And these persecutions raged in different provinces of the civilized world, with brief intervals, for more than three centuries, during which, without exaggeration, millions of Christians, men, women and children, were tormented and murdered to feed the enmity of the serpent in man against the Seed of the woman. Nor has this enmity ever been appeased. In modern times, the great Frederick II of Prussia and the infidel Voltaire carried on a correspondence, in which they closed their letters to each other, as is well known, with the words, “Crush the wretch,” meaning the Lord Jesus Christ. And what had He done to these mighty “sons of Belial” to draw upon himself their so fierce and deadly malignity? In like manner, the infidel philosophers of the last century put forth all their tremendous powers of argument, wit and sarcasm to destroy the Christian religion out of the world: equal malignity against it was manifested by the leading characters of the French revolution: to all which must be added, in our own times, the enmity of socialism, nihilism, and “science falsely so called.” For with what motive do sceptical scientists take such pains to convince us that there is no God, or, if there be, that He cannot answer our prayers, nor come to our help, when we ery to Him in our distresses and sorrows? Why should they go out of their way and labor to deprive us of the hope of immortality ; to persuade us that our souls perish with our mouldering bodies, and that we become as if we had never been? What interest can science possibly have in such horrible conclusions? Who can fail to recognize the animus by which all this is inspired? In the words of the Lord himself, “an enemy hath done this.” It is all the quenchless enmity of the seed of the serpent against the Seed of the woman. 140 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE Thus we see how one part of this symbolical prophecy—- the prediction that ‘the serpent should bruise the heel of the Seed of the woman’—is fulfilled: not less striking is the fulfilment of the other part, that ‘the Seed of the wo- man should crush the serpent’s head.’ For the whole his- tory of Christ in the days of His flesh was a series of victories over His great enemy. Though frequently as- sailed by the most subtle and powerful temptations, He resisted and overcame them all, and lived a life of perfect innocence and holiness. All His miracles were wrought in destruction of the works of Satan—the fruits and conse- quences of sin. It is only from this point of view that we can rightly comprehend His mighty works of healing the most malignant and otherwise incurable diseases, opening the eyes of the blind, unstopping the ears of the deaf, causing the lame to walk, casting out devils, and raising the dead. For in an unfallen world, there surely had been no place for such phenomena. And, as the Life itself, He rose from under the power of death, after all that was mortal in Him had been “crucified, dead and buried,” whereby He brought up out of the dark and loathsome grave light, life and immortality for all His people. ‘Through death He destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devil’ From His sacrificial death, inflicted upon him by the enmity of Satan and his seed, have flowed to mankind all the blessings of. the Christian religion. Upon the cross ‘He spoiled all the principalities and powers of evil, and made them a specta- cle of mockery for the folly of their wisdom, openly tri- umphing over them in it. And hardly less signal was His triumph over them in their persecutions of the primi- tive church, when the patience and constancy of her innu- merable martyrs drew the attention of all mankind, and exerted an overwhelming influence to convince them that such faith and patience must be truly Divine.” These examples of the crushing of the serpent’s head, in which his wisdom is shown to be the perfection of folly, THE TEMPTER 141 his greatest successes to be his greatest defeats, accomplish- ing the very objects which he labors to frustrate, saving those whom he plots to destroy, are such as to awaken in all rational souls the most confident assurance and expec- tation that everything else in which he is permitted to bruise the heel of the Seed of the woman will further con- tribute to the final destruction of his power. Thus, doubt- less, his present work in the Roman apostasy, denying the word of God to the people, prohibiting lawful mar- riage to the clergy, dogmatizing the infallibility of the pope, and the immaculate conception of the virgin mother of the Lord, and setting her up as an idol goddess and mediatrix between Christ and human souls—doubtless all this horrible impiety shall be overruled for good, and Satan’s wisdom in it be made to appear as folly, no less than in his crucifixion of the Lord, and his persecutions of the martyr-church. Thus, also, the assaults of modern scepticism, though they be not joyous for the present, but very grievous—distressing ofttimes to sincere souls as the Master’s death to his first disciples—yet is it no great stretch of faith to believe that they shall be made the means of establishing more firmly than ever the great _ truths which they call in question or deny; namely, that there is a God, that He has revealed himself to us in the Holy Scriptures, that He is our Heavenly Father, that He hears and answers our prayers, that Christ, by His holy sacrifice, has redeemed us from sin, death and hell, and that all who believe in Him shall be saved. The faith of these mighty truths shall surely come forth from all these conflicts as gold tried in the furnace. And as it appears that serpent-worship, in order to propitiate the powers of evil, has prevailed over the whole world, so “the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” Not until then shall we understand the full significance of this grand symbolic prophecy, that ‘the Seed of the woman shall crush the serpent’s head.’ Vill FIG- LEAVES And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked, and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons. And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God in the midst of the trees of the garden. And the Lord God called unto Adam and said, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me [caused me to forget] and I did eat. THE views of the original sin which have been given we find confirmed and illustrated, not only in the curse upon the serpent, but also in all the other transactions which are recorded as immediately following the trans- gression, and which are to be interpreted as symbols precisely similar to those which have been already analyzed. The first of these is that of the shame of the naked body which arose and manifested itself in our first parents after they had sinned. For in their estate of innocence, as we are significantly informed, “they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed ;” and this, no doubt, because there was nothing in their spiritual nature of which they needed to feel ashamed in the pres- ence of God. Their nakedness without shame was the appropriate and expressive image and symbol of their 142 i FIG-LEAVES 143 childlike innocence. For in early childhood this peculiar sentiment does not manifest itself, and in all art innocence is represented by a nude figure. But, now, as the first consequence of their having eaten of the forbidden tree, from which they had anticipated that their eyes would be opened to discern between good and evil by their own wisdom, their eyes were opened, indeed, but in a very different sense, so that they immediately became aware of the shame of their nakedness. Here, then, we have this peculiar shame in man accounted for by referring it to sin as its cause: and, perhaps, in the whole range of literature, ancient and modern, sacred and profane, there is no other attempt, which is worthy of attention, to explain the origin of this mysterious sentiment, although it is certainly one of the most striking and wonderful of all the phe- nomena of human life. This explanation, however, requires that we should take into account the two-fold nature of man, as composed of soul and body, in virtue of which our inward and spirit- ual experiences naturally seek for themselves some outward expression through the bodily organism. Pent up feelings seem to stifle us. In fact, human language itself must be conceived of as originating from this vital union between soul and body, in consequence of which whatever lives and moves in our spiritual nature demands and must find some outward manifestation through the physical organism. And so strong is this inborn tendency that it is not satis- ‘fied with mere words; it resorts also to the language of symbols. Our inward emotions, acting upon our bodies, instinctively and often involuntarily produce their corres- ponding and appropriate signs whereby they express themselves. Such symbolical and significant signs are the smnile, the frown, the outcry, laughter and tears. Now, when these first sinners experienced no such effects as they had been led to anticipate from their eating of the forbidden tree, but perceived, on the contrary, that they 144 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE had been deceived and betrayed to commit an act of stupendous folly and sin, whereby they had brought them- selves under the displeasure and wrath of God, they be- came conscious of inward and spiritual shame—the shame of sin and guilt. This, of course, was a new and strange feeling. Consequently, and because it was in the strongest contrast with the peace and joy of their former innocence, their consciences not having been seared by repeated trans- gressions, it must have been fraught with heart-piercing anguish beyond all that we can conceive. How unspeak- ably awful must have been the first experience of remorse in the human soul! Hence it could not fail to seek and find some new and appropriate sign or symbolical mani- festation. Pent up in their bosoms, it will stifle them. And how shall it manifest itself? It will surely find its own appropriate and significant expression, just as pleasure produces its smile, displeasure its frown, amusement its laughter, and sorrow its tears. Hence, as their pure bodies have hitherto been the most expressive symbol of their inward purity, so, now that their souls are defiled and polluted, the sight of their utter nakedness, vividly re- minding them of their lost innocence and bliss, cannot fail to add the most distressing poignancy to their shame for their sin and folly. In addition to this, as they have been betrayed into sin by following the wisdom of their earthly and sensual nature, of which nature their naked material bodies are the most tangible and visible represen- tation, they can no longer bear the sight of them, but must try, in some poor way, to cover them from their own, and from the eyes of God. Thus we may understand how it was that the inward and spiritual shame of sin, when it arose in the hearts of our first parents as anew and strange feeling, went forth, so to speak, and symbolized itself in the shame of their naked bodies, and in their attempt to cover them. | But why, we must ask, did this peculiar shame attach FIG-LEAVES chats itself most strongly to those parts of the body which an apron or girdle would cover? This will not seem strange if we consider that in those parts, above all others, the life, strength and lawlessness of the earthly and sensual nature, by which man was betrayed into sin, aresummed up and concentrated. Hence they are the chosen Scriptural type of this nature, as appears from the fact, among many others, that the sins of drunkenness, gluttony, and other excesses of the sensual affections, are not prohibited by name in the decalogue, but under this type, in the com- mandment: “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” This point will be further illustrated in the sequel. For this reason it was, no doubt, that the new and strong sentiment of spiritual shame for sin, when it sought an outward ex- pression, and reflected itself in the shame of the naked body, naturally and spontaneously attached itself most strongly, though by no means exclusively, to those parts of the body which an apron or girdle would cover. This explanation of the shame of the naked body in man is confirmed by the fact, that it does not appear in mere animals, nor in young children, and only in a feeble form among savages. For animals have only one nature, and this is in harmony with itself; they have no moral nature which can suffer degradation by subjection to their earthly and sensual life ; hence they are incapable of sin and shame. In young children, the moral nature is yet undeveloped. The voice of God has not yet made itself heard in their consciences distinguishing between right and wrong, good and evil. ‘The commandment has not yet come to them, and they have not yet sinned after the sim- ilitude of Adam’s transgression.” Hence they have no shame of sin, nor of their naked bodies, which are the ap- propriate and beautiful symbol of their as yet paradisiac simplicity and innocence. But as soon as the moral law begins to enunciate itself in their consciences, and their sin against it becomes clearly defined and conscious, the 146 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE shame of their naked bodies begins to manifest itself, as in the first sinners. With respect to savages, this senti- ment is feeble and obscure because their moral nature is feebly developed, and they hear only a confused echo of . the moral law in their consciences. But as soon as this law is made known to them, and they come to recognize themselves as sinners, their shame is felt, and they begin to cover themselves. In fine, this explanation is eee established by the fact, that, in the subsequent Scriptures, as has been in- timated, this peculiar shame is constantly assumed as the type and symbol of the spiritual shame of sin. Thus in the following and a thousand similar expressions: “ Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen...1 will discover thy skirts upon thy face, that thy shame may appear.” In fact, shame is the proper and Scriptural word to express the feeling of conscious guilt. It is altogether preferable to the heathen word re- morse, because it implies the presence of Him against whom sin is committed, and before whom. the conscious sinner feels ashamed, whilst remorse, which signifies the biting-back of sin into the soul, 7. e., the sting which it in- flicts, leaves Him out of view. Hence the form in which the prophet makes confession of his own and the sins of his people: “I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee my God, for our iniquities are increased over our heads, and our trespass has grown up unto the heavens.” Modesty, then, as we are here instructed, isa Divine symbol of sacramental significance, to nourish the shame of sin from which it proceeds in human souls. It is strong- est in woman, perhaps, because she was first in the trans- gression, and for other far stronger reasons which will be referred to when we come to consider the influence of her peculiar chastisement, under which she has become more pure in heart than is man. Its symbolical character is universally recognized, as when we say of any one who has FIG-LEAVES 147 cast off all moral restraint, that he is a shameless person. For in those who are thus ‘ given over to their own heart’s lusts, to work all uncleanness with greediness,’ so that they no longer feel the shame of sin, the shame of the naked body tends to perish with it. Not infrequently they are restrained from the exposure of their persons in public, and from open gratification of their brutal lusts, chiefly by their former habits, or by the customs of society, or by the penalties of human laws; and sometimes all these are in- effectual. It is against such that God himself brings the awful accusation : “Thou hast a whore’s forehead, and _re- fusest to be ashamed.” Whenever, therefore, a willingness to uncover the body in public manifests itself among those who have the knowledge of the moral law, especially in women, it is an infallible sign of great corruption of mor- als—the symbol perishing together with the sacred senti- ment which it is ordained to represent, quicken and nourish in human souls. In further explanation of this complex symbol, it may be observed, that it is not expressly stated whether God manifested himself to these first sinners in a visible form, nor whether they heard His voice with their outward ears, or only with the ears of their souls. In any case, they re- cognized His presence, and it was truly His voice which reached their consciences, and awakened their shame and fear. The expression, “in the cool of the day,” if that rendering be retained, may be intended to symbolize, that it was in a state of cool reflection, after the excitement and disturbance caused by their temptation and sin had sub- sided, they heard His voice in the garden. Literally ren- dered, however, it was “in the wind of the day ” that this occurred. Now the wind is the Scriptural symbol of the Spirit of God, with special reference to His invisible and inscrutable operations in the human goul, as in the words of our Lord to Nicodemus: “ The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not 148 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth ; so is every one that is born of the Spirit.” In fact, the word here is the same which is properly rendered “ Spirit,” where it is said: “The Spirit of God moved [brooded] upon the face of the waters.” Hence it may be that Adam heard the voice of the Holy Spirit in his conscience, calling him to account and judging him for his sin, in so sensible a manner that he seemed to hear it also in the rustling of the wind among the branches of the trees, thus taking the symbol for the thing symbolized. If this were so, it would account for the mention of the wind in this connection, and the ex- pression might be compared with Milton’s weird and thrilling lines—such, at least, to every one who has had any experience of that which they describe : Those airy tongues that syllable men’s names On shores and desert sands and wildernesses. However that may be, the whole transaction is evidently one of symbolical and spiritual significance. For here we behold the first human sinners, in their first experience of the shame of sin and conscious nakedness, trying in vain to cover themselves with leaves strung together, and to hide themselves from the Divine presence among the trees of the garden: we hear the voice of God penetrating into the depth of their hiding place, and calling to them in words which thrill their hearts with the anguish of guilt and terror, “ Man, where art thou ?”—making inquisition for their sin, discovering the shame of it under the flimsy covering of excuses and subterfuges with which they fain would veil and cloak it,and pronouncing judgment upon their trembling souls: in all which, we have what has always been recognized as a most vivid picture from the pencil of God of sinful and fallen man. For when the fleeting pleasure of sin has passed away, and the tumult which it produces in the sensitive nature and in the soul has subsided, the sinner who has not yet FIG-LEAVES 149 become utterly hardened and abandoned feels degraded and ashamed. He is now conscious that there is something in him which cannot stand the scrutiny of the all-seeing eye. He hears also the voice of God in his conscience, judg- ing, condemning him, and filling his soul with guilty ter- rors. Now he fain would hide himself from the awful presence. He tries to drown the accusing voice in the din of business, or the songs of pleasure—in the turmoil and clamor of the earthly and worldly life. But the voice follows him into his most secret hiding places, compels him to answer, and discovers his sin and shame. In vain he strives to hide it with excuses and palliations. He is con- scious that the all-seeing eye pierces through all those at- tempts at self-justification, and he is compelled to stand naked, guilty and trembling in the presence of his Judge. Ah, how changed his condition from what it was in the innocence of childhood, when, unconscious of voluntary transgression, he knew neither shame nor fear ! The attempt of the first man to excuse himself by lay- ing the blame upon his wife reveals the selfishness which his sin had introduced and established in his nature. For although he had been seduced by what bore the sem- blance of a generous sentiment towards her, since he preferred to share her fate, whatever it might be, even to retaining the favor of God for himself without her, yet, because he chose this in violation of the Divine command, the only criterion of what is truly generous and good, it has landed him in the heart of the most odious and loath- some selfishness and meanness. ‘Therefore, let the blame of his sin rest upon her rather than upon himself: “She gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” Poor girdle of fig- leaves—it cannot cover his shame ! The truth here symbolized is one of universal applica- tion. It is true that this selfishness of Adam is often sneered at by those who foolishly think that they would have felt and acted very differentiy. But such persons do 150 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE not appreciate the symbolical significance of this whole transaction, nor perceive that here, as elsewhere, the first man speaks and acts as representing all his posterity—in the character of sinful man. For, universally, that which may appear to man’s wisdom as prompted by generous sentiments, even as an act of heroic self-sacrifice, if it be chosen in violation of the commands of God, will surely generate selfishness and meanness in the soul : or, rather, that essential selfishness towards God which is contained in every transgression of his holy and just and good law will surely manifest itself in the transgressor as selfishness towards his neighbor. This is the secret of that burning enmity which so often springs up between those who have been led into sin by the stress and passion of un- lawful love, of which we have such a shocking example in Amon’s hatred of his sister Tamar, and which other- wise seems to be so inexplicable. For when the voice of God in the conscience makes itself heard in judgment upon the sin, then all those sentiments which before seemed so full of tenderness and sweetness are turned into gall and wormwood, and the essential selfishness which was their heart and substance from the first is made to appear. The reason is, that man is necessarily incompetent to dis- cern between good and evil by his own wisdom, and re- quires to have the distinction marked for him by the wis- dom and authority of God. Also, as here represented so universally, the sinner strives in vain to excuse himself by reasonings and devices of the carnal mind, in all which he lays the blame of his sins at last upon God. This is plainly the meaning of Adam’s words: “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” For conscious guilt is something too painful to bear. Hence, in order to silence the voice of the conscience within him, the sinner taxes his ingenuity to lay it upon some one else, or upon the circumstances in which he is placed— FIG-LEAVES 151 upon his forefathers, the inherited corruption of his nature, the strength of his temptations, the necessities of business, and a thousand other things. But none of these excuses can possibly have the least validity or force; they are all devices of the carnal mind, and “refuges of lies which the overflowing scourge of God’s judgment must sweep away.” The whole blame of sin must lie upon the sinner himself, otherwise it would not be sin. This is further evident from the fact, that all the temptations to sin which ever can be brought to bear upon man are necessarily present to the mind of God when He gives him His commands ; consequently, for everything which man can devise or think of to urge in self-justification or mitigation of his offences, God will always have an answer to this effect: I knew you would meet that temptation, and would have that reason for disobedience, when I gave you the com- mand, and if I had seen that it was a good reason, T would not have given you the command. Moreover, if such ex- cuses were valid as reasons for disobedience, they would convict God of giving unreasonable commands, and thus lay the blame of sin upon Him. For God, by his provi- dence, is the author of all the circumstances in which man is, or ever can be placed, except those for which man him- self is responsible. All this we have brought out with the utmost clearness in the parable which represents the man with one talent as excusing himself to his Lord in the fol- lowing words: “I knew thee, that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strewed, and I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth.” Hence the just severity with which his Lord rebuked and punished him: “ Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow! Where- fore, then, gavest thou not my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with 152 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE usury ?... Take, therefore, the talent from him... And cast ye the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” This vivid symbol, with all its significance, is repeated in the woman’s attempt to lay the blame of her sin upon the tempter: “ The serpent beguiled me [by causing me to forget] and I did eat;” in which, also, an additional excuse is presented, namely, that she was betrayed by the tempter into forgetfulness of something pertaining to the Divine command. ‘The repetition has the effect of solemn emphasis upon the import of the preceding symbol; besides which, the woman’s forgetfulness is hardly of less significance. Jor when she saw that the forbidden tree was pleasant to the eye and good for food and desirable to make her wise, in what sense we have seen—whilst her heart was thus occupied with the desires of her earthly nature—it seems that the Divine prohibition, with the penalty of disobedience, ceased to stand before her mind, receded into the background, was no longer an object of her thoughts, still less of her faith. But this excuse was no more valid than others; for whatever it was that she forgot, that was the thing which she ought to have remem- bered. In all this, however, we are not to understand that her experience was different from that of her hus- band, but rather that it stands here recorded as a univer- sal symbol; for thus it is universally with man. When the desires of the earthly nature and the reasonings of the carnal mind dominate over his spiritual nature—when the anticipated pleasures of sin, with all their attractions and charms, loom up before his mind—then the Divine law recedes into the background ; its penalties grow dim and uncertain; in comparison with the immediateness of the anticipated pleasure, they seem very far off, and perhaps will never come at all. ‘Thus the tempted soul is made to forget what above all things it ought to remember. Thus it is deceived and betrayed. FIG-LEAVES 153 And, now, the voice of God has followed the first human sinners into their secret hiding-place, discovered and made them conscious of their nakedness, 7. ¢., of the inexcus- ableness of their sin, and brought them to submit them- selves to His judgment: after which, we shall behold Him, in the mystery of His fatherly tenderness, by His own hand, and with new symbolical meaning, clothing their nakedness with a better covering than fig-leaves. In like manner, the judgment of God must finally reach the souls of all men who have “ sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression,” and bring them to confession and repent- ance, before they can be clothed in the righteousness of the sacrificial Victim upon whom He has laid the sins of the world. For whilst they continue to cloak their sins, i. e., to justify or excuse themselves by any devices which they can possibly think of, and thus to evade the convic- tion that they alone are to blame for all their transgres- sions, this judgment of God is yet a “ judgment to come.” But when the Divine voice in their consciences compels them to recognize their nakedness as still uncovered, all their devices of self-justification as no better than a flimsy girdle of fig-leaves, and all their attempts to cover their nakedness as adding to the inexcusableness of their sin ; when, thus emptied of all self-righteousness and self-trust, they take to themselves all the blame of the sin which God charges upon them, and submit themselves to His judgment as most just and righteous altogether ; then He always deals with them in fatherly tenderness and saving mercy. He judges the evil that is in them in order thereby to destroy it out of them. He clothes them in the righteousness of the sacrificial Victim whom He has pro- vided to bear the sins of mankind—a better covering, in- deed, for their shame than their own miserable attempts at excuses and self-justification. In fine, whatever chas- tisement, in the forms of labor and sorrow and death to their earthly nature, He ie see fit to lay upon them, 7 * 154 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE will be only such as are indispensable, in their sinful state, to the purification of their souls and to their prep- aration for heaven. IX THE JUDGMENT UPON WOMAN Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception [the sorrow of thy conception] in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children: and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. THE punishment of the tempter was truly and properly a malediction or curse, but these judgments pronounced upon the man and the woman were fatherly chastisements for their purification and salvation from sin. This dis- tinction is of great importance on many grounds, and especially because it enables us to receive what is now so much insisted on concerning the uses and dignity of labor in perfect consistency with this account. For to man, being now a sinner, these chastisements are truly blessings in disguise, being indispensable to the reduction of his earthly and sensual nature to its original subjection. Ac- cordingly, it is evident that, in the degree in which his deliverance from sin becomes realized, as Christian civiliza- tion makes progress, this tends to emancipate him from bondage to labor by subjecting the forces of nature to his control, so that they are made to do his work. Also, as the knowledge of his physical constitution increases, as medical science advances, as remedies come to be better known and more skilfully applied, as anzsthetics come into more common use, the pains and sicknesses which have their origin in sin, even those of childbirth, are sensibly mitigated, and may. finally be done away. For we know not yet how far this tendency may ultimately reach, nor what fulness of meaning future generations may find in 155 156 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the prophetic word: “There shall be no more death.... The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” It should be further observed here that this judgment upon woman is additional to all that she suffers under the chastisement inflicted upon man, and is, for the most part, peculiar to her. This, namely, that the heaviest punish- ment should be laid upon her, may seem strange to us, with our knowledge of the moral characters of the two sexes. Nor is it in any wise explained by the fact, that she was first in the transgression ; for this judgment was not pro- nounced upon the first woman alone, but it includes all her female posterity, of whom in no sense can it be said that they go before or lead men into sin. The true solution of the difficulty lies in the symbolical character of the trans- action, and in that these peculiar chastisements were indis- pensable, as we shall see, to the purification of the mothers of mankind, to whom, in fact, they have proved a source of the very greatest spiritual blessings. With respect, now, to this subjection of the woman, it certainly was not altogether a consequence of sin, but grew, in part at least, out of her natural relation to man. For she was created inferior to him in stature, physical strength, and other elements of her earthly nature, includ- ing that of the prudential wisdom which stood at its head. Consequently their marriage union with each other must have implied, even in their estate of innocence, some degree of dependence upon him for direction and guid- ance and other matters pertaining to their earthly life and welfare. But this could not have been in any wise un- pleasant or irksome to her, because he would require noth- ing but what was reasonable and right, and what would be her delight and happiness to render him. In fact, we must conceive of them both as being perfectly unselfish, and as preferring, from motives of love, each other’s hap- piness to their own. Moreover, this relation of the woman to her husband, even whilst they were innocent, was, as it THE JUDGMENT UPON WOMAN 157 still remains, a holy symbol, set up in the bosom of their daily life, to represent and cherish the consciousness of the union of their spiritual nature with God, and their subjec- tion to Him as the husband of their souls. Hence it is written: “The husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church... Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let wives be to their own husbands.” To the Church also it is said: ‘ Thy Maker is thy husband ;” and she is represented as “ the Bride, the Lamb’s wife.” These spiritual relations were represented by the marriage of Adam and Eve in paradise more vividly than they have ever been since. For the harmony of the marriage union suffered an earthquake-shock from the entrance of sin. ‘The first woman, in the very act of her transgression, in that she took no counsel with her husband in a matter of such tran- scendent importance, asserted independence of him, and trampled upon the holy symbol of her dependence upon God. Now, therefore, that nature in her by whose proud exaltation to act independently, and to rule her spiritual nature, she has sinned, is violently thrust back, and held in subjection to her husband, in order that thereby it may be chastised and trained to submission and obedience to the authority of God. Nor did it require any efficient interpo- sition on the part of God to produce this change, for it re- sulted necessarily from the new circumstances into which the woman had brought herself by her sin. This is indicated by the words : “ ‘Thy desire shall be to thy husband ;” the meaning of which is plain from the similar expression which is applied to Abel, concerning whom it is said to Cain: “‘ His desire shall be to thee, and thou shalt rule over him:” that is to say, Abel should be sensible of his in- feriority to his brother in age, strength and dignity, should feel his dependence upon him as the inheritor of the birth- right, and should look to him for counsel, guidance and protection, so that Cain would naturally have the ascend- 158 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ency and rule over him. In like manner, the woman now, by stress of the new circumstances into which sin had brought her, would be forced to recognize her dependence upon her husband, as necessary to her support, and even to the preservation of her life. Henceforth with desire must she look to him for support, protection and guidance, and submit to his rule over her, even though it should be ca- pricious, tyrannical and cruel. In fact, it could hardly be otherwise. For having seduced him into sin, whereby he had cast off the only adequate guidance of the wisdom of God, and had set up in its place as the law of his life the wisdom of his earthly and sensual nature, she had thereby destroyed all security for herself that he would require of her only what was reasonable and good and kind, and made it certain that he would often be unreasonable and exacting, passionate and jealous. Both of them, indeed, had now become selfish and wayward creatures, and would naturally prefer their own to each other’s comfort and happiness. The unity of that nature in which they were one by mar- riage, from the perfection of which their mutual affections and desires had hitherto flowed so calmly and sweetly to- gether, was now shattered. Conflicting judgments, opinions and desires would inevitably arise. Hence, for the possi- bility of their living together, one of them must be con- stituted the final arbiter of all such differences. But the woman could not stand in this relation to the man by rea- son of her inferiority in physical strength and other things which might be necessary to render her decisions effectual. Consequently, the man must be the head of the woman ; and however capricious and tyrannical he might be, she could not be allowed to separate herself from him, except for one offence ; and even this she would often find it better for herself and her children to pass over than to resent. Now, also, they were about to be driven forth from their blissful abode, where their food had stood ready provided to their hands, into a world of thorns and thistles, where THE JUDGMENT UPON WOMAN 159 the earth would not yield them even a scanty subsistence, until it should be subdued by strenuous and_ persistent labor, to which the physical conditions of the woman were ill-adapted and altogether inadequate. Now, therefore, she would be compelled to recognize and feel her need of her husband’s superior strength, courage and hardihood to labor for her support, to guide her steps through the pathless wilderness, and to defend her from violence in the times of unbridled lust, frequent murders, and universal lawlessness which were at hand. Indeed, if the woman had been left without special protection when “the whole earth was filled with violence,” she might have perished, and with her the race of which she was to be the mother. Thus we see that, by the mere fact of the entrance of sin, the relation which had previously subsisted between the sexes, though not subverted, was necessarily and essen- tially modified. That blissful dependence of the wife - upon her husband, which was the perfect symbol of the dependence of their souls in faith and love upon God, became, in so far as their union was vitiated by sin, sub- jection ; and this represented the new relation to God into which sin had brought them, and in which love alone would not be adequate, but He must maintain His authority over them for their good by his superior power. This subjection of the woman to her husband, however, pertains only to her earthly and mortal nature, by which she is united to him in marriage. In her spiritual nature, she is essentially free, and responsible to God alone, who is the only true and lawful husband of her soul: and if her human husband command her to do what God has for- bidden, it is her duty to disobey, whatever be the conse- quences, for “we ought to obey God rather than men.” God alone is the Lord of the conscience in woman as in man. This Divine symbol is now a most blessed means of grace to married people, but especially to the wife, because 160 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE © it nourishes her sentiment of dependence upon and sub- jection to God. Indeed, it can hardly be doubted but that to its influence the superior susceptibility to religious impressions of woman, as such, is in great part to be ascribed. or as the essence of sin is rebellion against God, so the very heart and substance of true piety is sub- mission—the submission of the earthly to the spiritual nature, of the spiritual nature to the conscience, and of the conscience to the word and wisdom of God—the sub- mission of conscious dependence, faith and love—passiyely, a.¢., to all the dispensations of Divine providence, and actively, in obedience to all God’s commands and ordi- nances. ‘I’o this subjection woman is trained from genera- tion to generation by the relation in which the wife stands to her husband. To her it is, in some sort, what the child’s subjection to his parents is to him—what the law of Moses was to the sincere Israelite—her schoolmaster to lead her to Christ.’ Hence, in general, she has become more submissive and docile to the Lord’s instructions than is man. for there is no one in this world to whom he is put in subjection, and, consequently, the earthly nature in him has unfolded itself with a ranker luxuriance than in her. His natural mind has thus become so puffed up with conceit of knowledge and power in earthly and _per- ishable things that he finds great difficulty in stooping and humbling himself to the submission of faith. He can hardly recognize it as a fool in spiritual things, that he may become truly wise by submitting it to the authority of the wisdom of God. Thus “the carnal mind” has at- tained to a more formidable development in man than in woman—to such arrogance, indeed, that often he under- takes to account for her greater susceptibility to piety by her intellectual inferiority. But she is inferior only in that which is “of the earth, earthy,” and in that wisdom which is conversant only with perishable things; whilst in THE JUDGMENT UPON WOMAN 161 meekness, obedience, self-sacrifice, and that ‘charity which never faileth,’ she is often and greatly his superior. Thus we are enabled to appreciate the Scriptural form of the marriage vow, in which the woman promises to “love, honor and obey her husband.” Yor thus only can this hallowed union fulfil the spiritual purpose for which it was ordained of God, namely, that it might serve asa holy, even a sacramental symbol of the mystical union be- tween the Lord and His church, which is His Bride. Nor is it inconsistent with, but rather a consequence of this, that, in the degree in which married life becomes purified from sin and its consequences, it tends to revert to what it was in paradise before the fall; that is to say, the authority of the husband ceases to be exercised otherwise than in forms which can hardly be recognized, and the obedience of the wife becomes simply that of love—to her a perennial well-spring of happiness. for wherever the anthority of the husband makes itself irksomely felt, and the wife yields an unwilling obedience, there is an imper- fectly sanctified marriage, there sin and its inevitable con- sequences still abound. With respect to the other part of this judgment upon woman, it plainly implies that if she had never sinned, though, doubtless, she would have borne children, she would have been exempt from the pains and sorrows of parturition. These are here represented as originating in and accounted for by sin, precisely as the shame of the naked body. Nor is there anything incredible in this when we consider how very light these sorrows are among savages, to whom the moral law is almost unknown, and in whom ‘sin, after the similitude of Adam’s transgres- sion, is not pronounced nor clearly defined. For it is only among civilized peoples, where, through luxury and other influences, the physical constitution of woman has become vitiated and enervated, and where the spiritual is consciously subjected to the appetites and desires of the 162 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE earthly and sensual nature, that this memorial of her sin takes on its most terrible form: at the same time, it is sensibly mitigated, as we see, and may be ultimately done away, by the progress of medical science and art, which have their roots in Christianity, and by the universal prevalence of Christian morality. In the present state of our knowledge, indeed, we can- not trace the immediate causal connection between the sin of the woman and this chastisement, as we have done in the case of her subjection, and in that of the shame of the naked body. But the symbolical and teleological connec- tion is quite obvious. For she had sinned, as we have seen, by the exaltation of her earthly and carnal wisdom to control the wisdom of God in her spiritual nature, as the law of her discernment between good and evil. For the gratification of the lust of the eye, and of the lust of the flesh in her sense of taste, and of a carnal desire to be wise in a way that it was impossible she should be, she had re- belled against the authoritative guidance of God in his commands and prohibitions. Consequently there was now attached to her gratification of those desires in which the whole fulness and strength of her sensual nature were summed up and concentrated the most fearful anguish and sorrow which she could suffer and yet survive. ‘Thus she received in that nature by which she had been seduced and betrayed this most significant and awful memorial of the nature of her sin, that by it she might be chastened, and might go in penitence and humiliation all her days. And as the first sin contained the root and principle of all sin, so this chastisement passed over upon all her female pos- terity. Hence it is that throughout the Scriptures this judgment upon the woman is taken as the symbol of God’s judg- ments upon sin in general, in order to represent and to im- press upon the human mind and heart the truth, that, although the sinner may pursue for a time the gratification THE JUDGMENT UPON WOMAN 163 of the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eye, and the pride of a life independent of God ; although the pleasures of sin may be keen and transporting, and their penal con- sequences may be long delayed; yet they are inevitable, and shall come upon him suddenly with such surprising and intolerable anguish that all these fleeting pleasures shall be no more remembered, or only with the agonies of remorse and shame. Thus in the following and many similar passages: “For when they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with-child,, and they shall not escape... Pangs and sorrow shall take hold upon them ; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth.” Hence, also, under this powerful symbol is represented the judgment of God for the sins of mankind as taking effect upon the great sacrificial Victim, through whose travail sorrows the souls of His people are born into the new life, and this, together with His unutterable joy over their new birth. Thus in the words of the prophet: “When thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed... He shall see of the travail of His soul and shall be satisfied.” And, perhaps, there is nothing which so powerfully rebukes the cavilling of the carnal mind against the mystery of the atonement as this dread symbol, in which all who have ears may hear the voice of God to mankind, saying: Do you not see that every child of human parents is born through the pangs and sorrows of its mother? Can you think ‘that I have ordained this great mystery to no purpose, or that it can be without spiritual significance ? Let it put to silence the cavils of your wisdom, which is folly, against the birth of the children of my kingdom into their true life through the travail sorrows of Him who is both their spiritual father and mother. In fine, this chastisement upon woman could not fail to exert a powerful influence for the purification of her heart 164 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE and life. Through all generations of human life upon the earth, it has stood before her mind in every temptation to unchastity, threatening her with its awful premonitions and terrors. ‘The impression which it makes upon: mothers is imparted to their daughters, who have never experienced it, through the silent but all-powerful intercommunion of life. Hence, in the normal moral condition of the two sexes, where man abandons himself, woman shrinks and trembles before the terrible future. T hus, in general, she has become more pure of heart than is man, The world- ling, or debauchee, who knows her chiefly through those of her sex whom his lust has ruined, may sneer at this, but it is none the less true. Woe to the human race if it were not! For if man had met with no obstacle to his unbridled passions in the repelling and subduing purity of the female heart; if he had not been constantly bathed in the purifying waters which flow from the hearts of mothers, wives, sisters and daughters; it can hardly be doubted but that the human race itself would long ago have perished from irredeemable corruption. Under the purifying influence of this two-fold chastise- ment—the sorrows of childbirth and subjection to her hus- band—woman has become more susceptible to the saying power of the gospel than is man. He, indeed, may be more capable of discursive thinking. To him religion itself is often but a thought. He is ever prone to mistake knowledge for life. He would much rather understand than submit his mind to the mysteries of redemption and salvation. A hard saying to him is that of the Lord: “If ye will do the will of my Father, then shall ye know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” It is a stumbling-block to him, that the obedience of faith must always precede sight or knowledge [7ydarc] 7. e. knowledge in the clearness and demonstra- tion of ideas. But with woman it is all different. She more easily submits her mind and heart to the authority of — _—. THE JUDGMENT UPON WOMAN 165 the Lord. To her the gospel is a life rather than a thought: and, by the intercommunion of life, as once she led her husband into rebellion and sin, so now she leads him back to the submission and obedience of faith, inform- ing his life with her own meek and obedient spirit, shed- ding upon his heart a better light than that of knowledge —the light of faith and love—and breathing into his soul something of the superior purity which she derives from her peculiar chastisement. Hence it is the Seed of the woman, as distinguished from the man, who crushes the serpent’s head; and it was a woman who first recognized the Seed when He came into the world. Women were His most devoted followers and ministers whilst He taber- nacled in the flesh. Women were the last at His cross, and the first at His tomb ; and it was to a woman that He first appeared after His resurrection from the dead. x: THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN And unto Adam He said: Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I com- manded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it, cursed is the ground for thy sake: in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life: thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee, and thou shalt eat the herb of the field: in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground, for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Tue first man, in yielding to the solicitation of his wife, put himself under the law of his earthly nature, by which he was united to her and rendered susceptible to her influ- ence. His sin, therefore, was the same in substance with hers, and hence it is here judged in a similar manner, Yet there is a difference between these judgments, in that one of them is more comprehensive than the other—that of woman being, for the most part, confined to her, whilst that of man includes both man and woman. It is true, indeed, that the peculiar chastisement of woman necessarily and powerfully affects, through sympathy and otherwise, the life of man. For the marriage union is of such a close and vital nature that the two persons who are thus made one are unavoidably and largely partakers of each other’s good and evil. - But this judgment upon man rests also on woman in all its particulars, for labor, sorrow and death are the common lot of humanity. The curse which is here laid upon the ground for the sin of man does not necessarily imply any miraculous change passed upon it or its productions: our understand- ing of it should rather be conformed to the interpretation 166 THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN 167 which has been given of the malediction upon the serpent. For the necessity of severe and painful labor would natu- rally come upon our first parents as the result of their expulsion from the garden of. Eden, where, with little ex- ertion on their part, the fruit of the trees supplied their simple wants. ‘his is evident from the fact, that such an abode was provided for their innocence, which implies that the surrounding country was not equally suitable, and allows us to conceive of it as a wilderness which would bring forth thorns and thistles, until it should be subdued and cultivated by human labor. Nor is there anything improbable in this, when we consider that the sin and fall of man were certainly foreseen by the all-wise Creator, and, consequently, a suitable abode and environment might well be prepared for him as a sinner beforehand, where strenuous labor would be necessary for his support. This view is further confirmed by the command which was given him before he had sinned to “replenish the earth and subdue it,” in which it is necessarily implied that the earth then required to be subjugated by human toil. Thus everything, as it came from the hand of the Creator, would be “very good” for that purpose for which it was created. However this may be, the natural world, in its present condition, is manifestly designed and adapted to be an abode and sphere for a sinful race. On the other hand, it is not incredible nor unscriptural that some change may have passed upon the earth and na- ture in consequence of the sin of man. Not unreasonably we may conceive of the life of man as being so connected, through his material nature, with that of animals and plants, and through them with the earth itself, that the whole natural world becomes, in some sort, a partaker of his good and evil. Evidently there is a certain corre- spondence and reciprocal influence between man and na- ture, and between the natural and spiritual worlds. Such correspondence is assumed in the parables of our Lord, 16 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE and in almost all Scriptural images and symbols. Figu- rative language itself rests upon it. And this reciprocal influence we see in the differences which have been pro- duced by natural causes between the inhabitants of tropical, teraperate and polar countries, between the black and white man; as, also, in the modifications which take place in animals and plants under domestication, and in all the manifold results of human agency upon nature. It has been observed, even by a skeptical historian, concerning the repulse of the Gauls from the siege of the temple of Apollo at Delphi by astonishing manifestations in nature : “This is very possible; for... it has happened more than once that such extraordinary phenomena occurred in such decisive moments.” * Hence, when the people of the old world were morally ripe for the judgment of God, a deluge of water was already prepared and in waiting to execute it. When the time was fulfilled that the earth should not again be destroyed in a similar manner, there was a rain- bow which could be designated as the token and seal of God’s covenant with Noah and _ his posterity, that there should be no more flood. We see the same thing in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and in the plagues of Egypt. Also, in that great battle which Joshua fought against “the five kings of the Amorites...the Lord cast down great stones from heaven upon them... they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the chil- dren of Israel slew.” At the same time, there occurred phenomena in the heavens which were regarded by those who witnessed them as the standing still in mid-course of the sun and moon, in order that the victory might be com- pleted. In like manner, “the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.” And passing over a multitude of similar instances, we have it recorded that, at the crucifixion of the Lord, “the earth did quake, and the rocks were rent -.. and the sun was darkened, and the vail of the temple * B. G. Niebuhr’s Lectures on Ancient H story, Vol. III., pp. 274-5. THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN 169 was rent in the midst,” together with many other portents and prodigies in the natural world. Moreover, it would seem from the prophecies on this subject that the renovation of the life of man through the faith of Christ will bring with it the deliverance of the physical world from its present disorders. We can hardly attach any other meaning to the following passage from St. Paul: “For the earnest expectation of the creature [nature, as distinguished from man] waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity [evil] not willingly [not for its own sin] but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope [by the will of God for His own wise and good purposes, with the promise of ultimate deliverance]. For the creature itself, also, shall be delivered from the bondage of corrup- tion into the glorious liberty of the children of God.” Expressions of similar import abound in the Scriptures : “The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them... Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir- tree, and instead of the briar shall come up the myrtle tree... And I saw a new heaven and a new earth... And He that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new.” Now, by whatever figures of speech these glowing predictions may be interpreted, they can hardly be made to signify less than that the renovation of human life will be accompanied by changes in the condition of the earth which will render it as suitable an abode for the saved as the garden of Eden was for man’s primal innocence. For this new life, when it shall be perfected, will require, as its appropriate sphere and environment, that “new earth” which the apostle John saw in his beatific visions. But how this “restitution of all things” will be brought about, we do not certainly know; perhaps, in part at least, by the 8 170 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE progress of science in subjugating the forces of nature and the properties of matter to human control. However these things may be, we see here that, as the garden of Eden has hitherto been the appropriate abode and significant symbol of man’s innocent and happy life, so now, under this judgment of God, he is placed in a very different sphere and environment, which symbolizes, in the most expressive manner, the spiritual evils which he has brought upon himself by his sin. The evil which has entered into him, the heart, head and intellectual eye of nature, in whom all its perfections are summed up, is now reflected in the whole creation around him, as in a thou- sand-faced mirror. He has broken up the harmony between himself and the world above him, and the world below him is no longer in harmony with him. He has come under bondage to corruption, and all things created for him are brought under similar bondage. Selfishness towards ° God has become the law of his life, and selfishness towards him has become the law of all things depending upon him. He has become a rebel and an enemy against God, and now the world that was put under him is in rebellion and enmity against him. Storms and tempests, earthquakes and volcanoes, noxious diseases, ferocious beasts and poi- sonous reptiles—the fatal forces of nature—will seek to de- throne him, as he has sought to dethrone God. He must. now re-assert and maintain his rule over them by his in- telligence and superior power, as God will maintain His dominion over him because “the weakness of God is stronger than man.” As he has refused to yield unto God the fruit of a willing and cordial obedience, so the earth will no longer render spontaneously her fruits to him. As he, left to his native tendencies, by his own wisdom and choice, will be fruitful in growths of sin and misery, so the untilled earth will produce thorns and thistles and poisonous plants. As the ground must now be broken up with the plough, tilled, fertilized, planted, and its growths tended THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN 171 in the sweat of his brow, so must he also be broken up with affliction and sorrow, ploughed over and over again with Divine chastisements, the seed of spiritual life com- municated to him anew, and carefully tended by the heavenly “ Husbandman,” before he can be made to yield any good fruit. * The labor and sorrow of mankind, however, do not spring altogether from conditions of the earth, but chiefly from the natnre of sin, of which they are the neces- sary consequences. For in adopting his own creature wisdom as the law of his discernment and choice between good and evil, man put himself under a totally inadequate and blind guide, which could not fail to lead him astray, nor to disappoint him in his pursuit of happiness, and * Hence the word tribulation, which literally signifies the threshing of corn from its husk and chaff, has come to be applied to those afflictions and sorrows by which God purifies the soul fromits sins. And notonly the threshing and winnowing, but also the grinding of corn into flour for bread, have thus become a most expressive image of what man must undergo, in order that he should be brought again to serve the uses of his Maker. This striking symbol has been developed by one of our early Christian poets as follows: Till from the straw the flail the corn doth beat, Until the chaff be purged from the wheat, Yea, till the mill the grains in pieces tear, The richness of the flour will scarce appear. So till men’s persons great afflictions touch, If worth be found, their worth is not so much, Because, like wheat in straw, they have not yet That value which in threshing they may get. For till the bruising flail of God’s corrections Have threshed out of us our vain affections ; Till those corruptions which do misbecome us Are by thy Sacred Spirit winnowed from us; Until from us the straw of worldly treasures— Till all the dusty chaff of empty pleasures— Yea, till His flail upon us God doth lay, To thresh the husk of this our flesh away, And leave the soul uncovered—nay, yet more, Till God shall make our very spirit poor— We shall not up to highest worth aspire ; But then we shall, and such is my desire. See Trench On the Study of Words, p. 39. 172 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE following which he must inevitably choose evil for himself instead of good. Hence whatever he attains fails to satisfy his desires, and he is ever tormented with a feeling of emptiness and want; the more he gains of that which seems good in his own eyes, the more he finds that it has no power to satisfy the cravings of his heart ; for the true and soul-filling good is not attainable otherwise than under the guidance of the wisdom of God. It is this ever un- satisfied craving, of which none are without painful expe- rience except those who have become altogether brutalized, which drives us forth on an ever fruitless quest, with labor and sorrow perpetually renewed. In youth, the world opens upon our senses with the most glowing promises, awakening the most confident expectations, that, with pru- dence and industry, we shall be able to work out for our- selves something which will make us happy. But when we succeed in obtaining or accomplishing any particular object, we find it altogether empty; and the experience of such disappointments, constantly repeated, pierces our hearts with the sharpest thorns. Yet we turn with renewed hope to other objects of pursuit, which lead us on to new toils of body and mind to experience new disappointments and sorrows. Still we are not convinced that the guide of life which we have chosen is inadequate and blind, and must forever lead us astray. Thus we are constantly attracted to new objects, to which “distance lends enchantment,” and which we clothe with all the illusions of sense and of the carnal mind. From the ashes of our ruined hopes new hopes arise with more potent delusion. What seems to our wisdom as if it could not fail to give us happiness, in ever-varying forms of earthly beauty and sensuous at- traction, leads us a long and weary chase from object to object, as the butterfly lures the child from flower to flower, until at last it rises out of his sight. Earthly pleasure is wooed with all the ardor of idolatry, and she does not with- draw her veil, nor reveal herself as the loathsome corpse THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN shee: she is, until the heart is married to her deformities and corruptions. Here is the main cause of man’s ceaseless toil and sor- row, the perennial root of the thorn and the thistle. The Divine judgment which condemns him ever to seek and never to find is the necessary consequence of the nature of his sin. And through this most sorrowful experience he has been passing from generation to generation and from age to age. Ever since the fall, he has been laboring to dig out of the earth, that is, to find in earthly things, something to satisfy the deep craving of his spiritual and immortal nature—something in the place of that which he lost when he cast off the guidance of the wisdom of God to follow his own wisdom in the choice which he has every moment to make between good and evil. Thus he still continues to repeat an experiment which has always failed, and which must forever fail. For all the fruits of his labor—all things that he works out by his own wisdom— his riches, sciences, kingdoms, empires, republics and civilizations—all fail—and still he is in want—still he is pierced with the thorn and the thistle, whose growth is perennially renewed—still his sorrows multiply, and his labor never comes to an end, If it had been otherwise, it is easy to see that salvation from sin would have been forever impossible. for if man had been allowed to remain in his garden of delight, or had been able, by his own wisdom, without labor or sor- row, io supply all his earthly wants, he would have lost all remembrance of the holy and blessed estate from which he has fallen, and would have come to regard his own wisdom as an all-sufficient guide of distinction between good and evil. With all his earthly appetites, desires and affections in their full strength, with the means of their ample gratification ever at hand, their most intense and protracted pleasures unattended by disease, pain, remorse, or sorrow in any form, with no fear of death before his 174 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE eyes, he must, in no long time, have lost all feeling of spiritual need, and all consciousness of sin. His con- science already confused, darkened, dethroned, would have been silenced by the unrestrained gratification of the lusts of his sensual nature—would have ceased to give forth its oracles in his soul. He would have become utterly stupefied in his spiritual nature, and thus would have sunk down to a level with the brute. For even in our present circumstances, this effect of temporal prosperity is mourn- fully exemplified. When a worldly-minded man is very prosperous, and comparatively exempt from sickness, pain and sorrow, not infrequently he seems to lose all feeling of the want of anything better than this earth can give, and all conscience of sin. Such is the fool in our Lord’s parable, who is represented as saying to himself: “Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years: take thine ease, eat, drink and be merry.” And of such it is said: “Their heart is as fat as grease, their eyes stand out with fatness, and they have no bands in their death ”—also: “Tt is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Thus we see that this judgment of labor and sorrow came upon man by necessary consequence from the nature of his sin, and that it constitutes a Divine memorial and holy symbol to nourish the feeling of spiritual want in his soul, to work in his heart, by painful experience, the con- viction that his own wisdom is an inadequate and blind guide for his discernment between good and evil, and to lead him back to the submission of faith in the wisdom -of God. For it is only through this feeling of want that he retains the capacity for receiving Christ as “the bread of life,’ which alone can satisfy the hunger of his soul. If never before, yet when he is worn down with fruitless labor of body and mind, when racked with sickness and pain, heart-broken with affliction and sorrow, then he feels the need of spiritual consolation, of something which this THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN 175 world cannot give, and turns away from all earthly things to the word and wisdom of God made flesh, to ‘that bread of life which came down from heaven, whereof if a man eat he shall hunger and thirst no more.’ With respect now to the judgment of death, with which that of labor and sorrow is here crowned, several obscure points require to be elucidated. For in this account of the origin of death in the human world, no light is thrown upon its prevalence in the lower realm of animals and plants, which, therefore, we are left to understand, as best we can, from the light of reason and nature. Now, that death reigned in the world of these lower organisms ages before man appeared on the earth, the present state of science does not permit us doubt. But this does not prove that this is no way dependent upon, or connected with, the sin of man. For the whole previous creation, including all that took place in those ages, was evidently a, prepara- tion for man in his present sinful and fallen state ; and, as we have seen, it was no less proper and necessary that, in this state, he should be surrounded by great disorders in the natural world than that an abode sequestered from all such disorders should be provided for his primal -inno- cence. All these, therefore, including death in organic nature, we may best understand as ordained of God in foresight of, and preparation for, the sin and fall of man. Nor is it probable that, if he had never sinned, his natural life would have been immortal upon the earth. For there seem to be reasons in his physical constitution why this should not be so, which cannot be ascribed to sin; and if the human race had not been depleted in some way, it would seem to be impossible that its numbers, ever multi- plying in a geometrical ratio, should have found even standing-room on the earth. Hence it is more reasonable to believe that, if men had never sinned, they would have been transplanted into some other state and sphere, yet without sickness or infirmity, perhaps by way of trans-. 176 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE lation, of which Enoch and Elijah furnish us with illus- trious examples. Here, also, it should be carefully observed that the words, “ Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,” can have no reference to the spiritual nature of man, which was not made out of the dust of the ground, but which God breathed into him. In strictness of logic, they can apply only to his materia] nature, for only that which was taken from the ground can be said to return to it again. But the original declaration, “In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die,” has a more comprehensive meaning, and certainly includes man’s spiritual nature, in which sense it was literally fulfilled. For his spiritual life, consisting in the knowledge and love of God, and nourished by the living bread of the word and wisdom of God, did perish the moment he lost his faith in God, and began to act from the dictates of his own wisdom and will in violation of God’s commands. And now this spiritual death is to be reflected and symbolized in that of his earthly nature, by whose proud exaltation to rule where its place was to obey he has sinned. The one was a natural, nay, a necessary consequence of the other. For the blind guide which he had chosen to follow would con- stantly lead him astray to choose evil instead of good— evil for the body as well as for the soul—and this would necessarily generate physical diseases, and work death in his earthly, as it had already done in his spiritual nature. In fact, at the point where these two natures were vitally united with eacl other in one and the same personality, death in the one would inevitably pass over and become death in the other. Thus all the diseases of the body became the scriptural symbols of the spiritual malady of sin. Hence the leprosy, being regarded as the worst and most incurable of all, was selected by Moses, and treated with a great variety of ritual observances, in order to interpret and enforce upon the minds of his people its spiritual significance. THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN Fit Hence also the prophets represent their spiritual and moral condition under such symbolical expressions as the follow- ing: “The whole head is sick and the whole heart fuint : from the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but wounds and bruises and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.” Thus also natural death be- came the great image and symbol of spiritual death, as in the following examples: “To be carnally minded is death... He that loveth not his brother abideth in death... He that heareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent me... is passed from death unto life.’ In these and ten thousand similar expressions, it is evident that what is signified by the word death is not the extine- tion of the natural life, but the effects and consequences of sin in the spiritual nature, of which the death of the body is taken as the outward form and sensible representation. Hence, when Christ came into the world, it was as the great Physician of souls; and He could do nothing more significant of His power to heal our spiritual maladies and to restore our spiritual life, than to heal, as He did, all manner of physical diseases and to raise the dead. It is only from this point of view that His miracles of physical healing can be rightly comprehended. Natural death, then, is the Divinely ordained symbol and image of spiritual death—of ‘death in trespasses and sins’—and as such it is infinitely expressive and _ terrible. For in the presence of a corpse, even the most thoughtless are struck with a certain mysterious awe, and all expres- sions of levity are felt to be utterly incongruous. How pale and rigid are these human features! These eyes, once so quick and bright and full of expression, have lost all speculation, and are without one gleam of intelligence. All the avenues of the senses are quite closed up. Com- plete insensibility—no volition, no thought, and cold, ah, how cold! No natural period can be assigned to this dream- * 178 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE less sleep. No human power can recall this dead body to life, or restore light to these darkened eyes. And already there are signs of decomposition—the air is tainted. Ina little while, this form, so “fearfully and wonderfully made,” will pass through all the stages of dissolution and loathsome corruption, so that it must be separated from all communion with the living—buried out of their sight— that it may not generate in them also disease and death. Such is the dread symbol which God has ordained to rep- resent that spiritual death which ‘has come upon all men, for that all have sinned.” For thus man, in his natural or Adamic state, is dead to all spiritual things—dead to the evils of his spiritual condition—dead to the consciousness of his sin, guilt and danger—dead to the feeling of spirit- ual want—dead to the knowledge of God, to the love of Christ, and to all the motives and obligations of grace— dead to the truths, admonitions, warnings, promises and hopes of the gospel. If you speak to him of these things, they make no impression upon his mind—he knows not what you mean. Already he is undergoing spiritual de- composition which is loathsome to God, and pestilential to all other human souls. Left to himself, abandoned by the Spirit of God, he will soon become a mass of corruption, which must be put away out of sight—buried in the grave of the dead soul—separated from all communion with liy- ing souls—that he may not infect and poison their spiritual atmosphere. And from this state of death in sin, no man has power to raise himself to life. No merely human help can ever reach his case. Even the preaching of the gospel, apart from supernatural influences accompanying it, how- ever eloquent and touching, is utterly in vain, as it actually proves to multitudes of dead souls. This tremendous symbol of spiritual death has been set up in man’s earthly nature because it was by its proud elevation he sinned. Hence the light of this nature goes out in utter darkness, that is, because it has proved an THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN 179 ignis fatuus to lead him astray from the path of life. Hence death comes upon him in spite of all his prudence and vigilance to guard against it, in order that he may be made to know and feel that the guide he has chosen in place of the wisdom of God is utterly incompetent to dis- tinguish aright between good and evil. Also the darkness in which the light of the mortal life goes out represents and symbolizes the horrible darkness to spiritual things which sin has brought into the soul of man. The pain and agony and sorrow of dissolving nature represent the pain and agony and sorrow of spiritual and eternal death—what Jesus calls ‘the worm that never dies, and the fire that never shall be quenched.’ And in that death comes upon all the children of Adam, even upon infants, it signifies that spiritual death, in germ if not in full growth and development, is implanted in every human soul. For “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned.” In fine, this fearful chastisement was laid upon man in mercy, and not in wrath, as indispensable to his salvation. For the awful apprehension and fear of death is one of the strongest motives to deter from crime, and to lead sinners to repentance. If it had not been for this, there is little room for doubt but that the human race would have sunk into irretrievable perdition. We see evidences of this in the history of the old world, when the life of man was almost indefinitely prolonged, and universal corruption prevailed, so that, as it would seem, even God could do nothing better with the race than to destroy it. For the symbol and chastisement of death occurred so seldom from natural causes, and could be regarded as so far off, or un- certain, that its influence to deter from crime could scarcely: have been felt. Hence mankind were left free to rush into the most horrible excesses, so that the earth was soon filled with violence and blood. And when the time came for a Divine promise that there should be no more a flood, 180 ‘WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE and, consequently, that moral corruption should never again rise to such a height as to make one necessary, human life had to be greatly shortened, and the frequency of death correspondingly increased, as one of God’s greatest mercies and moral influences for the purification of human nature. And now death occurs go frequently in every community and in the bosom of every family, the sorrows of bereavement are so universal, life is so un- certain to the young as well as to the old, that only the most hardened can be insensible to the awe and fear which these influences naturally awaken, or insusceptible to the motives which they supply to prepare for eternity. In- deed, when the king of terrors enters into our houses, and lays his cold hands on our most beautiful and best beloved, when we behold them in the agonies of dissolving nature, the light of their mortal life going out in utter dark- ness, and when we consign their bodies to the tomb, we cannot help feeling ourselves to be Divinely instructed and admonished that this earth is not our home, and of our need of being ever prepared for our own decease, Thus, also, the consciousness of immortality is nourished in our souls by the hopes which we cannot but cherish of re- union in the spiritual world with our loved ones who have gone before us. Hence it would seem that, apart from such influences, the Lord’s purposes of grace and salvation could not have been realized, and that the thorn and the thistle are no more a blessing in disguise than the certainty and frequency of death. Nor-can this powerful symbol ever be dispensed with, except as the Lord’s salvation makes progress in the world, by which, we are assured, the power of death shall ultimately be broken and destroyed. In fact, the average length of human life in Christian countries is now far greater than in any others. Wars, pestilences and famines are less frequent and less destructive in such countries than formerly they were, and still are among pagan and THE JUDGMENT UPON MAN 181 Mohammedan nations, where Christian morality has gained no footing, where agriculture is less developed, where facilities for the transportation of food are altogether in- adequate, and where municipal cleanliness and sanitary science are almost unknown. Meanwhile, death is not death to the Lord’s true people. For them He has con- quered this king of terrors; “ hath abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” To the true Christian, the grave is no longer dark, since the Saviour has burst open its portals. It is now the low door through which, bowing our heads, we enter the glorious mansions of our Father’s house. And in this sense it is written: “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death....O death, where is thy sting! O grave, where is thy victory!” XI THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS Unto the man also and his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them. Gop did not spare, as we have seen, to pronounce and inflict upon man for his sin the tremendous judgments of labor and sorrow and death; and can it be supposed that He now goes about to provide him with a good suit of clothes, and that, by such means as stripping their skins from innocent animals, for no other purpose than to keep -him warm, or to relieve him from a trifling bodily incon- venience? No, this transaction cannot be so understood. Rationally considered, it must be recognized as a Divine mystery. Tn order to disclose its symbolical meaning, we must re- call the origin and significance of the shame of the naked body, as having sprung up in the human heart out of the spiritual shame of sin, which it symbolizes and represents. This physical shame the first sinners tried to cover for themselves, as best they could, with a flimsy girdle of fig- leaves. But, conscious that this was altogether inadequate, they were still ashamed and ‘afraid because they were naked,’ and fled to hide themselves from the presence of God amidst the trees of the garden. Here, being dis- covered by the Voice which followed them, they were com- pelled to render themselves up to the Divine judgment. And now they are clothed, not by their own but by the hands of God himself, in the skins of slain animals, and thus their shame is effectually covered. 182 THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 183 Morever, that these animals were slain for sacrificial pur- poses hardly admits of a doubt when we consider that such sacrifices were certainly prescribed and enjoined upon this first human family. We have satisfactory evidence of this in the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. For in the epistle to the Hebrews, we are informed that “by faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts.’ Now faith, in its Scriptural sense, always implies a revelation from God in some form as its object. Hence the question necessarily arises, what had God revealed to these two brethren in which Abel believed, and in which Cain had no faith? In answer to this ques- tion, let it be observed, because it is significantly stated, that the sacrifices themselves were as different as were the receptions which they met with: “Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord, and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering, but unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect.” From this it might reasonably be inferred, and with a strong probability, that God had commanded them both to offer bloody sacrifices. But the subsequent words of God’s remonstrance with Cain leave noroom for doubt upon this point: “And the Lord God said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” Now the Hebrew word here translated “sin ” is frequently used, and elsewhere it is so rendered, in the sense of a sin-offering. Also, the word “lieth,” more literally, is lying, is most fre- quently applied to animals. It contains even a reference to the peculiar manner in which quadrupeds dispose of their four legs in lying down to rest. For these reasons, the best Hebrew scholars and interpreters of Scripture have long been agreed in rendering “sin lieth at the door” 184 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE' a sin-offering is lying down at the door ; and, thus inter- preted, the sense of this Divine remonstrance with Cain js as follows: Why art thou disappointed and angry? What else couldst thou expect but that thine offering should be rejected? If, indeed, thou hadst been without sin, it, : consisting of fruits and flowers, would have been appro- priate and acceptable; nay, thou wouldst have been ac- cepted without any offering. But, being a sinner, a differ- ent offering was properly required of thee. Even yet, how- ever, it is not too late; for the animal which I have desig- nated asa sin-offering is now lying down at the door of thy tent. Take that,and having shed its blood, offer it to me in sacrifice, with confession of thy sins, and thou too shalt be forgiven and accepted. Hence the inference that the family of Adam had received a Divine command requiring them to offer bloody sacrifices, and that it was this revelation in which Abel believed, and Cain did not, seems inevitable: nor can we conceive of any more proba- ble occasion on which these sacrifices were first offered than that on which God clothed the first sinners in the skins of slain animals. Here, then, in the very commencement of human his- tory, as soon as sin had entered into the world, God _insti- tuted that stupendous system of education and preparation for man’s redemption by the sacrifice of the innocent for the guilty, of which we have such a full account in the Old Testament, and which He carried on with the utmost rigor and persistency until the great Victim suffered on the cross of Calvary. | For this was an idea so foreign and naturally revolting to the wisdom of this world that it had to be laboriously educated into the human mind, in order to render faith in the validity and efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ to take away the sin of the world even a possibility. Hence this education was commenced as soon as man had sinned, even before he had left his prime- val abode: and throughout the long line of patriarchs from THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 185 Adam to Moses, no other sacrifice, except this of Cain, is ever offered to God but those of animals in their blood. This primeval revelation flowing down through the ages in all the divergent streams of human life, affords us the most probable explanation of the offering of such sacri- fices among the heathen, in which they may have been supported and confirmed also by a Divine instinct, like that of their blind faith in God, in immortality, and in a future judgment. But in order that this educational preparation might be carried on in the most systematic and effectual manner, God, in due time, called Abraham out of the world, and made him the covenant head of a chosen people, whom he se- questered, as far as possible, from all foreign influences, and enjoined upon them an all-moulding system of political, social, moral and ritual institutions, laws and observances, in all which He seems to have kept this object steadily in view. Even the principal events of their history, such as those of the smitten rock of Horeb, and the brazen ser- pent in the wilderness, seem to have been Divinely ordained and pre-arranged with the distinct purpose of preparing their minds for the great sacrifice upon which the destiny of the world was to depend. But, above all, there were three lines of such preparation which require to be distinguished from all the others, and more particularly elucidated. The first of these is that vast and most wonderful ritual of bloody sacrifices which was enjoined upon them by Moses, and which is so particularly and minutely de- scribed in the book of Leviticus. * This continued in force, and the burden of it was borne by the people with astonishing patience and constancy, for 1500 years ; * The criticisms of Kuenen, Wellhausen, Robertson Smith and others, in the judgment of the author, utterly fail to prove that the book of Le- viticus was not written by Moses. He regards the methods of these writers as altogether untrustworthy, and as being speculative rather than critical. 186 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE during which, every morning and evening, and on all ex- traordinary occasions in the lives of individuals and in that of the nation, the blood of innocent victims, with the confession of sins, was offered to God. And, once a year, on the great day of atonement, the high priest, in the presence of the congregated thousands of Israel, made con- fession, in “large utterance,” of the sins of the whole people, with the shedding of the blood of sacrificial animals, which he took and sprinkled on the mercy-seat of Jehovah- between-the-cherubim in the Holy of Holies. Almost everything in that ritual was purified with blood, ‘and without the shedding of blood was no remission of sins.’ This idea lay at the bottom of almost all the prescribed rites of the worship of God. It was symbolized and rep- resented in every conceivable form. The whole religious, social and political life of the people was made to centre in and revolve around it from generation to generation and from age to age: and all this, that they might be filled with it, and their minds moulded upon it, that it might become the object of all their hopes for time and eternity. Such pains did God take to prepare the people out of whom the great sacrifice was to come, so that among them there might be raised up those who should believe in it, and go forth to preach it with power to ail other nations. No less educational and preparatory were the mediation and ministry of the prophets, who were appointed of God as the organs of His authoritative communications to His people in fulfillment of His declaration to Moses : “I will raise up unto them a prophet from among their brethren like unto thee, and I will put my words into his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I command him : and it shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken — unto the words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.” For this wonderful prediction eyi- dently referred primarily to that long line of prophets who succeeded Moses for more than a thousand years, and THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS are ultimately to the great Prophet who should come into the world as the crowning term of the series. In this way, the people were familiarized with the idea of mediation be- tween God and man, and with that of authoritative rev- elations of the spiritual world through mediatorship. This preparation was carried still further by that vast body of prediction concerning the Mediator to come which was delivered by the prophets, and in which were explicitly foretold His genealogical descent from Abraham through Judah and Dayid, His supernatural birth of a virgin, the mystical constitution of His person as Immanuel, both God and man, the sinless perfection and sublime self-sacrifice of His character and life, His miracles and mighty works, and all the principal events of His earthly history, especially, His most holy sacrifice for the sins of the world, together with the regeneration of human life and society which should follow it, and the salvation of all who should be- lieve in Him. But, above all, the circumstantial particu- larity with which the prophets described His sufferings and atoning death was evidently intended to deepen and per- fect the impression made by the ritual of bloody sacrifices, that salvation could come to man in no other way than by the sacrifice of the innocent in place of the guilty. For these prophecies commence with the words of God to the original tempter of mankind : “TI will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her Seed : He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel.” They are continued in the Messianic Psalms as follows : “T am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws, and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have compassed me about, and the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me ; they pierced my hands and my feet.... They parted my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.” 188 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE And the mediatorial and sacrificial character of His suffer- ings is thus exhibited: “Surely He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows....He was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities ; the chas- tisement of our peace was upon Him, and with His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray ; we have turned every one to his own way ; and the Lord hath laid upon Him the iniquity of us all.” In fine, the great object which should be accomplished by His sacrificial mediation : “ When thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hands, He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satis- fied. By His knowledge [by the knowledge of himeelf ] shall my Righteous Servant justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities.... Because He hath poured out His soul unto death, and was numbered with the trans- gressors, and bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors :” the final result of all which should be, “to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness.” These are only a few ex- amples of innumerable predictions in which the sacrifice of the great Victim, together with its consequences, was foretold in preparation for His coming, and which do not only demonstrate that sacrificial atonement for the sins of mankind entered into the Divine purposes of grace and salvation from the foundation of the world, but, also, by their punctual fulfilment in Jesus Christ, constitute over- whelming evidence that He was the true Messiah. Also, the moral law, as delivered through the mediation of Moses, was intended from the first as a means to the same ultimate object: “The law was our schoolmaster [pedagogue] to bring us to Christ.” For with all its per- fection it could not save men from their sins. N ay, its perfection was the very thing which excluded them from THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 189 salvation. For it required a faultless obedience in thought, word and deed, and pronounced utter condemnation on every transgression: “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” It always was, and forever must be, impos- sible for sinful man to satisfy the claims of this law, not only because he is “without strength” unto a perfect obe- dience, but also because it finds him already a sinner, and under its condemnation, its demands being that it should never have been violated. “ Wherefore, then, serveth the law?” What was the precise effect which it was intended to work in order to prepare men for faith in the sacrifice of Christ? St. Paul, especially in his epistles to the Romans and Galatians, labors to elucidate this point. “The law,” he tells us, “was added because of transgression, until the Seed should come.... The law entered that the offence might abound.... By the law is the knowledge of sin.” He certainly does not mean by this that the law was given for the purpose of rendering man more sinful than he would otherwise have been, for sin is ever the abominable thing which God hates, and for the putting away of which He has made the greatest of all possible sacrifices. His eternal opposi- tion to sin is just that which the law reveals and expresses by the terrible rigor of its prohibitions and condemnations. But the inborn corruption of human nature [7 dyapta| does not become actual transgression until the claims of the law are brought to bear upon it, “for where no law is there is no transgression ;” nor is it recognized by the sin- ner as truly and properly sin, until it does pass into trans- gression. In fact, the consciences of those who are ignorant of the law, although their lives may be sunk in the depths of moral corruption, give them little trouble. But when they come to the knowledge of the law, this inherited cor- ruption of their moral nature, by the acts of transgression to which it prompts, is evolved or brought out in the con- 190 | WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE sciousness and convictions of the soul, as the root, principle and very substance of all sin. Hence the agonized cry of the holy apostle: “ When I would do good evil is present with me....O wretched man that I am, who shall de- liver me from the body of this death?” The law, there- fore, is God’s means for making man to know how deep and radical his sinfulness is, and how helpless he is in himself under it, in order that thus he may be brought to feel his need of a Saviour. It is true, however, that the law, though not the cause, is the incidental occasion of man’s becoming more sinful than he ever could have been without it. This is frankly conceded by the apostle in such passages as the following: “Without the law sin was dead.... Iwas alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin re- vived and I died.... For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me....Sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence.... The strength of sin is the law.” His meaning is, that the moral corruption of hu- man nature, by the pressure of the holy law, is stirred up to actual transgression and self-conscious rebellion; and the same truth is contained in the words of the Lord: “If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin.” Yet, as St. Paul strenuously insists, because the law is not the cause, but only the incidental occasion, of this in- creased sinfulness, this is not to be ascribed to the law, but to its true and proper cause, which is the native depravity of the human heart: “ For the law is holy, and the com- mandment is holy and just and good.... But Iam carnal, sold under sin.... Was, then, that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin [it was, this de- praved, perverse, corrupt moral nature, which was in me before I knew any law—this it was which was made death unto me] that it might appear sin [from the fact of its] working death in me by that which is good; that sin by THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 191 the commandment might become exceeding sinful.” In other words, the exceeding sinfulness of the moral nature in man is brought out and demonstrated by the fact, that it perverts and abuses the just and holy and good law of God into an occasion of becoming more sinful than were otherwise possible. All this in man proceeds from the same thing which in Adam made him afraid of God, and drove him to fly and hide himself from the Divine presence. For the law represents God in the sole attribute of justice, making in- quisition for sin, and pronouncing condemnation upon the sinner; whom it finds in rebellion against its authority, with his mind darkened, and his heart alienated and hard- ened, so that he can neither feel nor see the paramount claims of Divine justice, and so grounded and built up in selfishness that he naturally prefers his own gratification to all other things, and cannot consent that even the justice of God, which has now become a terrible and hateful object, should be executed. Hence, whilst God is thus represented to his mind through the medium of the law alone, which thunders its fearful doom upon every trans- gression, his Maker himself becomes the object, not only of his fear, but also of his enmity ; and this is the crown- ing term in the development of sin—to hate God is the life of spiritual death. From all this, it seems evident enough, that, whilst man continues under the law, 2. e. whilst he regards it as a full and complete revelation of the character of God; whilst he continues to be agitated by the fearand embittered by the enmity which it stirs up in his heart, he cannot because he will not, or he will not because he cannot, return to God in submission, faith, love and obedience, but remains under a moral necessity to fly further and further from the source of his life, and to plunge himself deeper and deeper into sin and perdition. For, in the words of St. Paul: “ The Scripture hath shut up all under sin, that the promise 192 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” Through such experience as this the sinner comes to sce and feel that, if he is ever to be saved at all, he must have some further revelation of the Divine character beyond all that is contained in the law; and thus his mind is opened, and he is otherwise prepared for the new disclosures of the gospel. Hence his need of a final and all-controlling revelation that God is not his enemy, but his best friend, even his Heavenly Father. He must be convinced that even the Divine justice, which pronounces the sentence of death upon the Adam in him, is not inconsistent, but is co-existent with such mercy and compassion and love in God that He is ready and willing to make the greatest possi- ble sacrifice to save him from hissins. And because his sin consists in the adoption and preference of his own wisdom in place of the Divine as the guide and supreme law of his life, this manifestation of the love and fatherly heart of God towards him must be made in such form and man- ner that he cannot possibly believe in it without having the pride of his own wisdom crushed, and the wisdom of God restored to its true place and supreme authority over his mind and heart and life. What, now, is that grand and solemn mystery which de- mands or can be fitly announced and ushered into the world by such a stupendous scheme of preparation as this? What can be the proper end and fulfilment of this vast ritual of shedding the blood of innocent animals, and offering them to God with confession of sins, during so many centuries? By what unique event in the history of mankind can the ministry and the predictions of the prophets through so many generations be crowned and fulfilled ? How shall the expectation of a more full and complete revelation of the character and heart of God, which has been awakened and nourished by so many ages of a legal dispensation, be so met as to satisfy man’s deep- THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 193 est necessities by reconciling him to God, and saving him from his sins? Let the answer be given in God’s own words: GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD THAT HE GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON THAT WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH IN HIM SHOULD NOT PERISH BUT HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE... Wom GOD HATH SET FORTH TO BE A PROPITIATION THROUGH FAITH IN HIS BLOOD TO DECLARE HIS RIGHT- EOUSNESS FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS THAT ARE PAST... THAT HE MIGHT BE JUST AND THE JUSTIFIER OF HIM WHICH BELIEVETH IN JESUS... HE IS THE PROPITIATION FOR OUR SINS AND NOT FOR OURS ONLY BUT ALSO FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD... FoR WHEN WE WERE YET WITHOUT STRENGTH IN DUE TIME CHRIST DIED FOR THE UNGODLY... WHEN WE WERE ENEMIES WE WERE RECONCILED TO GOD BY THE DEATH OF HIS Son... In HIM WAS THE LOVE OF GOD MANIFESTED... HEREIN IS LOVE NOT THAT WE LOVED GOD BUT THAT HE LOVED US AND SENT HIS SON TO BE THE PROPITIATION FOR OUR SINS... GOD COMMENDETH HIS LOVE TOWARD US IN THAT WHILE WE WERE YET SINNERS CHRIST DIED FOR US... GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF GODLINESS—Gop WAS IN CHRIST RECONCILING THE WORLD UNTO HIMSELF NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES UNTO THEM Such, shen, is the grand mystery of the gospel, by which the sacrificial ritual and the prophetic ministry of the Old Testament are fulfilled and crowned ; which reveals God in the fulness of His mercy and love; which brings de- liverance from the condemnation of the law; which crushes forever the head of the serpent in man; which ‘finishes the transgression, makes an end of sins, and brings in everlasting righteousness,’ | For this most holy sacrifice of Christ is a stupendous mys- tery. This arises from the fact that it stands as a middle term between the incomprehensible nature of God and the no less ROUT PRE n ena e nature of moral evil. It reaches 194 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE upwards into the infinity of God’s being and attributes and downwards into the unfathomable depths of the origin and nature of sin. Hence it is, and must forever remain, a mystery to the finite mind; that is to say, it cannot be analyzed by logical processes, nor explained in logical con- ceptions. Let aman analyze God, explain God; let him solve to the satisfaction of the rational understanding the problem of the origin of evil: then may he undertake to explain why the innocent must suffer for the guilty, and how such suffering avails and operates efficaciously to atone for sin. Yet many attempts have been made at such explanations, but all of them have proved signal failures, as may be made to appear from one or two examples. The first of these represents this sacrifice as having its necessity in public justice, as a grand governmental scheme to save the honor and maintain the authority of the vio- lated law in the eyes of the moral universe, to which also the mercy and love of God are thus manifested. But it is certain that this view does not explain the ultimate ground of its necessity, as may be evinced by such con- siderations as the following: 1. The distinction which this scheme implies between God and His law cannot be main- tained. Tor His law is the undistorted reflection and image of His nature and character, as respects the attri- bute of justice ; how, then, can there be anything in this reflection which is not in that which is reflected? Con- sequently, if God’s law demands such a sacrifice, there must be something in Him which demands it. In like manner the public justice of God can be nothing else but His essential justice, as realized and manifested in the goy- ernment of His moral creatures. Hence we may eliminate the ideas of law and publicity from the whole question, and consider it as one between God himself and His sinful creatures, 2. The Divine law, as revealed to us, does not demand that the innocent shall suffer for the guilty, but THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 195 that every one shall be punished for his own sins: “The soul that sinneth it shall die,” and not another in its stead. How, then, can the law be satisfied or vindicated by that which it does not demand, and which, by its very terms, it excludes? 3. When the sacrifice of Christ is thus re- solved into a mere manifestation to make an impression upon the moral universe, if we Suppose, as for the pur- pose of testing the scheme we have a logical right to do, that there is no such universe, but God alone with only one moral creature, and that this creature has sinned—in this case, there is no conceivable necessity for any such sacrifice, because there is no moral universe to be impressed by it. For aught that appears, that one sinner could be forgiven and saved as well without as with it. But from the manner in which it is always represented in Scripture, and from the personal and vital relation to it of every individual believer, there seems to be no room for doubt but that it would have been as necessary for that one sinner as it is for a million, or for mankind at large. 4. If the sacrifice of Christ have no other object but this of manifestation, for the purpose of making a good im- pression upon the moral universe ; if it have no validity or necessity but that of its good effect as a public spec- tacle, it necessarily loses, as soon as this becomes known, all power to work any such effect. For what good im- pression can be produced on our minds by beholding the innocent suffering for the guilty, when we fully under- stand that there is no necessity for it but that of making such an impression? In fact, this conception of the most holy sacrifice reduces it to the category of a spectac- ular and theatrical performance, which, as soon as we are admitted behind the scenes, and are allowed to recognize its unreal character, loses all its power of illusion upon which its effect depends: to us it is no longer a real transaction. When, e. 9., we behold on the stage the murder of king Henry VI by Richard ILI, if the illusion 196 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE be well nigh perfect, and we can almost think it real, we are ready to start from our seats and ery out, Lay hold — on the bloody murderer: but when we remember that it is nothing but a spectacular performance, having no ground or validity in itself, and no object but to produce a moral impression, we contemplate it with entire equanimity, and go home to sleep and forget it. rom such considerations as these, we easily see that this governmental scheme affords no adequate explanation of the sacrifice of Christ. In fact, it is only when we understand that there is an eternal necessity for the sacrifice, arising out of the nature of God and the nature of sin, that it produces the effects which are ascribed to it asa spectacle. Then, indeed, it makes the most profound and awful impression upon the moral universe; then it constitutes the most glorious manifestation of the justice, grace, mercy and love of God ; then does it accomplish all the governmental ends which this scheme has in view. Another conception of this Divine mystery represents it as a true and effectual propitiation and satisfaction ren- dered to the essential justice of God, apart from which He could not, without the sacrifice of justice, have had mercy upon sinners, but must have treated them in all respects as they deserved—as that by which He makes it right for Him to forgive and save sinners, which otherwise would have been wrong. Properly, also, it includes the idea, that this propitiation renders God propitious, or disposed in himself to show mercy, although there are many theologians who dé not so understand it. This view is evidently much more profound, and probably a nearer approach to the truth than the preceding, but it is encum- bered with very grave difficulties, and consequently it fails to give entire satisfaction to the logical understanding. For, in the first place, it does not, any more than the preceding, account for the substitution of the innocent in place of the guilty, nor show how this can be any true or THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS AST proper satisfaction to Divine justice. Theologians, in dis- cussing these points, not unfrequently resort to sophistical reasonings. or God, they tell us, revealing His essential Justice in His law, declares that all sin must be punished, but does not declare unchangeably upon whom this punish- ment is to be inflicted, whether upon the sinner himself, or upon a substitute; and this declaration, we are further told, is confirmed by the universal consciousness of man- kind. But, unfortunately, neither of these statements is true. or the human consciousness does not yield abstract or general propositions such as this; they are reached only by the logical processes of abstraction and generalization. Consciousness, in all its deliverances, is exclusively con- crete and particular. Search it as we may, we find no such proposition as this, that all sin must be punished ; but we do find, after every known transgression, as written upon our very souls, the affirmation, This my sin ought to be punished upon me. Now, from this deliverance of con- sciousness, we may lawfully, as we find it to be universal, abstract the universal proposition, that all sin ought to be punished, but we cannot lawfully reason upon or draw conclusions from it as if it left the subject of such punish- ment undetermined. In strictness of logic, the proposition requires to be completed in this form, All sin ought to be punished on the sinner himself, which must be accepted or rejected in its totality. For whatever invalidates either part of it is equally destructive of the other. Still less, if possible, is the mutilated form of this proposition con- tained in any revelation of His justice which God has given us. For His law, as we have seen, proclaims in thunder-words, that the sinner must be punished for his own sins: “ Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” This is the voice of Divine justice, which cer- tainly makes no provision for a substitute to suffer in the sinner’s stead. How, then, it must be asked here, as in 198 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the former case, cah this law be satisfied with what it does not demand, and which is excluded by the very terms in which it is revealed? In fact, this attempt to show a necessity for the sacrifice of Christ from the groundless assumption, that the justice of God and human conscious- ness declare that all sin must be punished, but do not specify upon whom, whether upon the guilty or the inno- cent, is one of the most transparent sophisms ever devised to reconcile the wisdom of God with that of man. In the second place, there is no Scriptural warrant for the notion, that, apart from the sacrifice of Christ, God would have been obliged in justice to treat all sinners as they deserved, and still less, if possible, for that of its rendering him propitious, or disposed to show mercy. For everywhere it is represented as having originated in the antecedent love of God for the sinful world. In- fluenced by this love He provided the Victim, and that, since nothing else would do, by surrendering His only begotten Son to the accursed death of the cross: “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.’ And this gift of His Son must necessa- rily be conceived of as implying and manifesting ante- cedently all the grace, mercy and love which flow from it. Hence all gracious dispositions must be recognized as existing in full activity in the heart of God prior to the atonement, and not as procured by it. He, then, apart from the atonement, was not obliged in justice to treat sinners as they deserved, for manifestly He did not so treat them when He gave His Son to ransom them by the sacrifice of himself from the punishment which they justly deserved. No less evident is it that God did not need to be propitiated, in the strict or proper sense of that word, for He was as propitious to sinners as it is conceivable that He could be when He provided such a Victim to suffer in their stead. Finally, if it would have THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 199 been inconsistent with His essential justice for Him to for- give and save sinners without an atonement, how was_ it not such for him to show them that mercy which provided an atonement for them ? These are some of the difficulties in consequence of which this method of evincing a necessity that the imno- cent should suffer for the guilty can never give entire satis- faction to the logical understanding. And, in fact, when this great mystery of grace and salvation is believed in on such grounds as either of these schemes presents, and otherwise would be rejected, it is received only because it is thought to commend itself to that very wisdom of man which, as applied to spiritual things, it is intended to crush. Now, from the failure of these two most comprehensive, plausible and widely accepted philosophies of the atone- ment, and from the fact that it isa middle term between two incomprehensible infinities, we may fairly conclude that it was intended forever to remain an insoluble mystery to our finite minds. Whence its necessity arises, and how it operates efficaciously to atone for sin, we must regard as among the secrets which God has reserved unto himself, and which, no doubt, it is absolutely impossible for us to comprehend, or resolve intellectually, so that they should be no longer mysteries to us. Indeed, we are Divinely forewarned that this substitution of the innocent in place of the guilty under the law and the justice of God could not be other than foolishness in the eyes of man’s wis- dom. For it is this substitution, beyond all other things, which makes the cross of Christ “a stumbling-block to the Jew and folly to the Greek,” 7. ¢. the greatest possible offence to the wisdom of this world, in all its variant national forms and different degrees of development and culture; not because it is folly, for in itself it is “the wisdom of God,” but because human wisdom is foolishness with God, and “the foolishness of God is wiser than men.” Hence it is not to be received or believed in for the above nor 200 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE any other explanations which have been or ever can be given of it, but simply on the authority of God, who has taken such infinite pains to educate and prepare the human mind for the faith of it, and has set it forth in Christ as the sole ground and hope of human salvation. This is the strongest evidence we could have of its necessity and effi- cacy. ‘The bare fact, that God has given His only begot- ten Son to the cross for us sinners, and that ‘Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us,’ is enough to give us assurance, beyond all other knowledge, that, as God viewed the matter, who only sees all things as they are, there was an infinite necessity for this great sacrifice, and of its Divine efficacy to take away our sins. Nay, it is safe to say that God himself did not know any other way in which He could save sinners, for if there had been any other way known to Him, He certainly would have spared His beloved Son the horrors of the cross. In fact, we do not need to understand the grounds of its necessity, nor the mode of its efficacious operation. On the contrar 7, it was fitting and altogether indispensable that our sal- vation should be made to depend upon something which could not be other than mysterious to us in the highest degree ; in which we could not believe without the most plenary renunciation and abnegation of our own wisdom in application to spiritual things, and the most absolute and perfect submission of our minds to the authority of the wisdom of God. And this is just what takes place in every soul that comes to believe in this transcendent mystery. For when we do truly believe in the necessity, validity and efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ to atone for our sins, receiving it as the truth of God and the sole ground of our salvation, though it be foolishness in the eyes of our wisdom, then do we truly and utterly renounce and repudiate our own wisdom, and submit ourselves to the wisdom of God, as the only adequate guide of dis- tinction between truth and falsehood, good and eyil. THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 201 Here only do we fully recognize our own wisdom as fool- ishness with God, so that our confidence in it is forever subdued and overthrown; here only do we restore the wisdom of God to its true and original place and authority over our minds, hearts and lives. Thus it is, and not otherwise, that the head of the serpent in man is finally crushed under the bruised heel of the Seed of the woman, and that which was lost in the fall is recovered by faith in the atonement. But if any one should ask, How can we believe in what seems foolishness to our wisdom? the following illustration may be given to solve this difficulty, and to throw still further light upon the relation to God’s authority into which we come by the faith of this mystery. A little child, being left to his own judgment, will be perfectly sure, from the impression which the sun makes upon his sense of sight, that it moves through the sky, whilst the earth stands still. But his father informs him that this is not true; that the sun, contrary to all appearances, stands still, whilst the earth, which seems so solid and immovable, is spinning round faster than his top. He is too young as yet, and his mind is too feeble for him to receive any demonstration of this truth, but he has faith in his father’s superior knowledge and wisdom, consequently he believes what he tells him, although it be thus contrary to all ap- pearances. Now, in the exercise of such faith, in direct opposition to what would be his own independent judg- ment, he necessarily renounces his own wisdom, as not valid in the premises, and submits his mind to that of his father. He cannot so believe without recognizing and feeling that his own view of such things, as compared with that of his father, is foolishness. Such is the effect produced in man, who is God’s little child, by faith in the sacrifice of Christ as ‘the great mystery of godliness,’ He, therefore, who would explain away its foolishness, which St. Paul was so careful to preach, “lest the cross of Christ should be OK 202 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE made of none effect ;” he who would commend it in the eyes of man’s carnal wisdom; labors to deprive it of all its power to crush the head of theserpent. ‘Thus preached, after it has been thoroughly manipulated with this object in view, it comes forth like Samson from “ the lap of Philis- tean Dalilah ” shorn and betrayed. It is no longer St. Paul’s but another gospel, which is neither stumbling-block to the Jew nor folly to the Greek, and consequently neither the wisdom nor the power of God unto salvation. For this great mystery of godliness is revealed from heaven to be sub- mitted to, not reasoned away; to be believed in solely on the authority of God, and in full recognition of the truth, that ‘ His thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor His ways as our ways, but high as the heavens are above the earth so high are His ways above our ways and His thoughts above our thoughts.’ * Now, it is in this great sacrifice of atonement for sin that God reveals and manifests the fulness of His eternal love and pity for us sinners. For when we behold Him giving up His only begotten Son to die for us, we cannot but ask, What made Him do it? and the answer is, Be- cause he so loved us. And when we behold the Son himself voluntarily yielding up His soul unto the accursed death of the cross, we ask again, What made Him do it? * Olshausen, in his comments upon 1 Cor. I, 18, 19, and IT, 6, 7, exhib- its this essential opposition between the wisdom of God in the gospel and that of man as follows: “The preaching of the gospel, therefore, must not be performed in human wisdom; in fact, the latter destroys funda- mentally the power of the former because the two (viz. the gospel and human wisdom) are antagonistic elements, admitting of no union; one depriving the other of its nature, and each striving to annihilate the other. Where, therefore, human wisdom rules, the gospel appears as folly; but where the gospel bears sway (7. e. has manifested itself as Jivautc Ocod, the Divine power which takes man captive) there human wisdom appears as foolish- ness, and the preaching of the cross as genuine wisdom....In_ this view, the gospel has and ever retains the nature of a mystery which the Almighty has prepared for man from the foundation of the world.” Olshausen’s Commentary, American Edivion, Vol. IV. pp. 213, 223. THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 203 and the answer is the same, Because He so loved us. Evidently nothing beyond this, as a manifestation of the love of God, is conceivable. And He so loved us while we were yet in our sins—sinners against Him and enemies of His authority, character and person ; else He could not consistently lay it upon us as a duty to love our enemies. Hence, also, itis written: “God commendeth His love tow- ard us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us... When we were enemies, we were reconciled unto God by the death of His Son.” Moreover, it is through this manifestation alone that salvation from our sins reaches us. For when we come to believe in the love which is thus revealed, not only is our own wisdom recognized and renounced as nothing better than folly, but also the delusion which has its source in our alienation from God, that He is alienated from us and has become our enemy, is scattered to the winds; and that fear which springs from our conscious guilt, and drives us away from the Divine presence into deeper and deeper alienation and enmity, is banished from our hearts. Thus we are made free and embol- dened to return to God in repentance, faith and love, as to the only true source of our life and well-being. Nay, we are, in some sort, sweetly constrained and forced thus to return. For by this manifestation God follows us out into our alienation, rebellion and enmity, and proclaims His love to us there; and thus takes away our fear, melts our hearts, and wins us back to himself, as it were, in spite of ourselves. It is here that we first learn against whom and what manner of love we haye sinned. For that He should love us, being innocent, does not seem strange; but that He should never have been alienated in heart from us; that, from the moment when we began to sin against Him, He should have devised a way to save us, should have prepared a sacrificial Victim in His well- beloved Son to bear our sins in His own body on the tree; 204 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE this, indeed, is the great mystery and wonder of Divine love in our eyes. Thus He heaps coals of fire upon our heads, and melts our hearts in penitential sorrow for our sins, For this brings out our sin as committed against such love in God, as so unreasonable, inexcusable, malig- nant, loathsome, abominable, that we cannot choose but repent of it. This reveals such an unfathomable love in the heart of God that, whosoever believes in it, upon him it has an overwhelming, soul-subduing power. It melts the most obdurate heart. It breaks down the most in- veterate enmity. Such is the omnipotence of God’s good- ness and love as revealed in Christ. Hence it is written: “Sin shall not have dominion over you because ye are not under law but under grace... By grace ye are saved.” -.. ‘Behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind of Divine judgment rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks, and blew upon my guilty soul ; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind, an earth- quake of Divine wrath, which caused the solid ground to rock under me; but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after tle earthquake, a raging fire of the Divine law was kindled up around me; but the Lord was not in the fire: but, after the fire, a still small voice, which said unto me, I have loved thee with an eternal love, and have redeemed thee by the sacrifice of mine only begotten Son. That was the voice of God; and when I heard ALD wrapped my face in my mantle, and bowed my head, for my God had conquered me; and that which gave Him the victory was His eternal love as revealed in the most holy sacrifice.’ This faith in God’s love to us, as manifested in the gift of His Son, is the primary and unfailing source of our loye to Him. For although He is infinitely lovely in himself, yet we, with our minds blinded by the alienation of our hearts from Him, do not and cannot discern the glory and beauty of His character, until we come to regard Him THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 205 through this assurance of his love to us: “ We love him because he first loved us.” And this assurance, as we can easily see, must have been given to our first parents in their symbolical clothing by the hand of God in the skins of sacrificial animals. Jor, as we have seen, the shame of their naked bodies originated in, and thus became the sym- bol of their inward and spiritual shame of conscious guilt ; and their attempt to cover it with a girdle of fig-leaves represented their desire and efforts to disguise, excuse and palliate their sin, to cover the shame of it from God and from themselves. But they needed a better covering than any which they could provide for themselves; for they were still ashamed and afraid, and fled to hide themselves from the Divine presence. ‘The Voice followed them into the depth of their hiding place, and pronounced upon them, notwithstanding all their excuses and palliations, the sentence of the law which they had violated, that sen- tence of death which St. Paul tells us he had received in himself, and which every one must receive upon the Adam in him when and wheresoever God reaches him with the condemnation of the Divine law. But, now, this sentence having been pronounced upon them, God gives them a sign and token of His graceand love by clothing them in the skins of sacrificial animals—a striking symbol of the way He has prepared for their salvation; which, together with the promise that the Seed of the woman should crush the serpent’s head, makes an end of their delusion that He is their enemy, and convinces them of the tenderness of His fatherly heart towards them. for thus it is declared to them in words and by act more significant and expres- sive than any words, that He has determined not to leave them in their sin and ruin; that their great enemy shall not finally triumph over them, though they have put them- selves under his power ; that his head shall be crushed by the Seed of the woman herself, who has been first in the transgression. But they must seek no more to excuse or 206 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE palliate their sin by devices of their own minds afore that they can devise or do for this object must forever prove in vain, of no more avail than their girdle of fig- leaves to cover their shame. They must lay bare the na- kedness and shame of their souls to the searching scrutiny of God. He must judge the evil that is in them jn order to destroy it out of them. He alone can effectually cover their shame and take away their fear. Nor can He do this in any way comprehensible to their minds. Their sin cannot be put away by any means which their wisdom would choose. An innocent victim must suffer in their stead. This is foolishness in their eyes, because their wis- dom is foolishness with God. It demands the submission of their minds to the wisdom of God. And He has pro- vided the victim to bear their sin and carry their trans- gression. He clothes them in the skins of sacrificial ani- mals, the most impervious, substantial and durable material, in sign and token, that the covering which He provides for sin and shame is complete and perfect, an everlasting right- eousness, which once and forever takes away the shame and fear which drive deluded souls away from His presence and from life. And these robes of righteousness He pro- vides for them not otherwise than by the sacrifice of inno- cent animals to symbolize and signify that the righteousness which only can cover the sin of man must be found in the sacrifice of the innocent for the guilty, even of “the Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the world.” Thus He said to our first parents, as He says to all sinful souls: Be no longer ashamed nor afraid, nor fly to hide yourselves from my presence; but return to me in filial confidence, love and obedience ; for I am your heavenly Father, and have covered your nakedness and shame. There are innumerable significant allusions both in the Old and New Testaments to this symbolical transaction, which cannot be understood without constant reference to it. These are such as the following: “ He that covereth THE CLOTHING WITH SKINS 207 his own sins shall not prosper.... Woe to the rebellious ... that cover with a covering, but not of my Spirit, that they may add sin to sin.... Blessed is he whose trans- gression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.... Thou wast naked and bare; I passed by and spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness....Thou hast covered all their sins....He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness....I counsel thee to buy of me white raiment that thou mayest be clothed, that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear.” Now, it seems very strange that sin should thus be represented as needing to be cov- ered. But when we discern in all such allusions their pointed reference to its shamefulness, and to the manner in which God covered the nakedness of the first sinners, and manifested unto them His forgiving love and fatherly ten- derness, these expressions become perfectly natural, and exceedingly expressive of the deliverance of the human soul from conscious guilt and shame and fear through the merit and righteousness and most holy sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. ; XII THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us to know good and evil: and now lest he put forth his hand and take of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever—Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken. So He drove out the man, and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword which turned every way to keep the way of the tree of life. It has been already observed, that, in no intelligible or conceivable sense, was man rendered more like God by sinning than he was before, because the whole effect of his sin must have been to mutilate and deface that image or likeness of his Maker in which he was created. What, then, are we to understand by these words of God: “Be- hold, the man is become as one of us to know good and evil”? There is but one possible solution of this diffi- culty, which is, that the words be interpreted by the figure of speech called solemn irony, the force of which is, that the meaning of the ironical expression is precisely the opposite of its literal import. But as this may be re- garded, in the present case, as a bold procedure, it becomes necessary to warrant it by exhibiting the not infrequent use which is made of this figure in the Scriptures, and even by our Lord himself. We call attention, then, in the first place, to the famous ironical address of the prophet Elijah to the priests of Baal. For after they had sacrificed, “and called on the name of Baal from morning until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us, but there was no voice, nor any that answered... . 208 THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 909 it came to pass at noon that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud, for he is a god! Lither he is talking, or he is pursuing [gone a-hunting] or he is on a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked!” Here, now, the prophet evidently means to express the precise opposite of the literal import of his words, namely, that Baal was no god at all; and this meaning he enforces by attributing to him such employments and _ recreations, and in these such entire pre-occupation of mind, as pre- vented him from attending to the prayers of his deluded worshippers ; all which is absurdly inconsistent with the notion of his divinity. In this way the prophet pours out his righteous indignation upon these misleaders and cor- rupters of the people, and exposes the grossness of their folly and stupidity more eloquently and with greater severity than were otherwise possible. In like manner Solomon, using the same figure, exhorts the young to give themselves up to levity and excess in the enjoyment of earthly pleasure, and to the folly of allowing themselves to be guided by their own wisdom, which, as we have seen, was the original sin itself: ‘ Rejoice, O young man in thy youth, and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thy heart and in the sight of thine eyes ; but know that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.” Now, the former part of this address is evidently ironical, but in the latter part the irony is dropped, as is commonly the case, In order to guard against misunderstanding. The meaning of the whole is: Rejoice not, O young man, in these vain and transitory pleasures; wall not in the ways of thine own heart, nor in the sight of thine own eyes, i. €., follow not thine earthly desires, nor thine own wis- dom, as the guide of thy life, since for all these things God will surely bring thee to a terrible reckoning. Moreover, in the Holy Scriptures, God is frequently represented as rebuking sin by solemn mockery of its folly, 210 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE inasmuch as it consists in man’s rejection of the Divine wisdom, and in the preference of his own, in the choice between good and evil; and this, even where irony, which is the most expressive figure for such mockery, does not appear. ‘Thus, in the words of the heavenly Wisdom: “ Because [ have called and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand and no man regarded; but ye have set at naught all my counsel, and would none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your calamity, I will mock when your fear cometh; when your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind ; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.” It is true that to the senti- mentality which now so generally prevails such represen- tations may seem harsh, but the only point to be established here is, that they are Scriptural; and it is certain that in no other way could the folly of sin be so clearly exhibited and so powerfully emphasized. Again, by the Psalmist, the folly of the nations and their rulers in rebellion against God is held up as an object of Divine derision: “ Why do the nations rage, and the peo- ples imagine vanity? The kings of the earth set them- selves, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord, and against His Anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh ; the Lord shall have them in derision.” But it is still more worthy of remark that our Lord Jesus Christ himself sometimes resorts to this figure of irony as being necessary- to the best expression of His ideas and sentiments. Thus, when on His return from His agony in Gethsemane, after having in the most solemn and tender manner requested His disciples to watch and pray with Him through His dark hour, He found them asleep, He said: “Sleep on now and take your rest; be- hold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners: rise, and let us be going; be- THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE papi hold, he is at hand which doth betray me.” Now here there are three things to be observed: 1. If He had in- tended them to remain asleep, according to the literal im- port of His words, He would hardly have addressed them in a speech which, in order to have any effect at all upon their minds, must have awakened them. 2. In the lat- ter part of His address He gives precisely the same reason for their awaking which, in the former part and in the same breath, He had given for their continuing to sleep, namely, the imminence of His betrayal, and which, if it had been a good reason for the one, could not have been for the other. 3. In order that it might be impossible to mistake His meaning, in the latter part of the address He drops the figure and expresses himself literally, command- ing His disciples to awake, and be ready for the shocking event which was about to take place. The whole is as if He had said: This is, indeed, a time for you to be sleep- ing, when your Lord and Saviour is about to be betrayed and crucified! Rise, and let us be going, for the betrayer is just at hand. In like manner, the whole parable of the unjust steward is certainly a strain of terrible irony, although, in default of those inflections of the living voice by which, no doubt, it was interpreted to those who heard it delivered, it does not seem to have been subsequently recognized as such. The evidence on this point, however, must be placed in a footnote.* In a number of instances, also, * The literal interpretation of this parable is involved in insuperable difficulties, and the positive evidence of its ironical character is such as leaves nothing to desire, except the interpreting power of the living voice, and even without this it is demonstrative. For this steward is called to account by his lord for having wasted his goods, and is about to be deprived of his office: whereupon, in order to make provision for himself, he con- spires with his lord’s debtors to defraud him, and his lord commends him “because he had done wisely.” Now, here, several things are to be ob- served, as, 1. That no master ever thought of commending or praising a servant for any wisdom exercised in defrauding himself. Masters have quite other thoughts and sentiments when they discover such roguery in 212 ‘WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE similar ironical passages occur in the writings of the apos- tle Paul. Now, with such frequent use of this figure in the Scrip- tures, we are fully warranted and authorized in applying it to whatever in this mysterious passage may require it, in order to yield an intelligible sense. And it is a matter of thankfulness that, for such application of it here, we have the authority of two of the greatest names in the whole history of the church. For St. Augustine, inter- preting the words, “ Behold, the man has become as one of us,” says: “God does not concede that man had become like himself; but He upbraids him with his failure. ... Not only did man not become that to which he aspired, but he lost that [likeness of God] in which he had been their servants. Literally interpreted, therefore, the parable is manifestly and grossly untrue to nature, whilst absolute truth to nature is one of the most distinguishing and beautiful traits of all the other parables of our Lord. 2. There is absolutely nothing in the conduct of this steward which properly can be commended, or held up as a model for imitation; least of all, that which has been commonly supposed, namely, his prudence, or foresight. For there is no more of these qualities here than in any other case in which an agent defrauds his principal, and is caught in the act. This superlative fool, who is too lazy to work and too proud to beg, has not wit enough to conceal his roguery—it is all found out—nor ean it be supposed that either he, or his joint-conspirators, were allowed to retain ° the fruits of their roguery, after it was all detected. N ow, what wisdom, or prudence, or foresight is discernible in all this more than in any other ease of transparent and detected fraud? 8. The words, as properly ren- dered in the authorized version, are: “‘ And I say unto you, Make to your- selves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye fail they may receive you into everlasting habitations.” Now, when shall the dis- ciples of Christ fail? When shall they have need of anything that the mammon of unrighteousness can supply them with? And where did the mammon of unrighteousness get everlasting habitations to give them? These questions necessarily arise out of the literal interpretation of these words, and they admit of no rational answer. 4. But if the parable be interpreted by the figure of solemn irony, all these difficulties vanish, and the whole clears up at once. For thus we have, as the true sense of the words, “And the Lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely ; for the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light,” the following: Surely your Lord will commend you for unfaithfulness in matters of trust, if you can conceive it possible ee THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 213 created.” Each of these statements necessarily implies that Augustine understood the words in an ironical sense. Venerable Bede, also, or Beeda, as it seems we must now call him, expressly declares that he so understood them. For, after giving the above citations from Augustine, he quotes and comments as follows: ‘“ ‘Behold, Adam has become as one of us,’ just as the apostle, where he says: ‘Forgive me this wrong,’ certainly means to be understood in the contrary sense.” ‘Thus interpreted, the true sense of these words may be given in the following paraphrase : Behold how man has attained the object of his insane aspi- ration to become equal to us in ability to discern between good and evil by his own wisdom, and that, by committing sin, which has defaced and well-nigh destroyed our like- that any master should praise his servant for such roguery as this! And it will be wise for you to imitate this rogue’s example, if it be so, that the children of darkness are wiser in their evil generation than the children of light, who are guided by the wisdom which is from above! 5. But the crowning proof of the irony of the parable lies in the application which the Lord himself makes of it, where, dropping the figure lest He should be misunderstood, He proceeds to warn his disciples, in the most direct and pointed manner, against this unjust steward’s example, and to hold it up to utter reprobation. For, in palpable reference to his folly, no less than to his iniquity, He now declares: “He that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. If, therefore, ye have not been faithful in the un- righteous mammon [as this man was not], who shall commit to your trust the true riches? [%. e. the everlasting habitations]. And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s [as this steward was not], who shall give you that which is your own?... Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” Thus we see that this much misunderstood parable, as interpreted by the Lord himself, holds up the character and conduct of the steward, who was no less fool than rogue, as the very opposite of true wisdom, and as, in every respect, to be reprobated and abhorred—that it was not spoken to recommend prudence or foresight, but against that cove- tousness or greed of worldly wealth which is the parent of all breaches of trust, and of all forms of cheating and stealing. 6. Finally, this interpre- tation is abundantly confirmed by what is immediately added: ‘ And the Pharisees who were covetous heard all these things, and they derided Him.” For they plainly perceived that the parable was spoken against them. And this led Him to follow them up with another, that of the Rich Man and Lazarus, which is directed against the same earthly and sensual greed. 214 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ness in his soul! This figure governs, also, the interpre- tation of the words which immediately follow: “ And, now, lest he put forth his hand, and take of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever.” For although it has been supposed by some that this tree contained a physical virtue by which the natural life of man would have been indefi- nitely prolonged, so that death would have been unknown, yet, as he certainly did not obtain the incommunicable power of independent ‘discrimination and choice between good and evil by eating of the forbidden tree, so it is ra- tionally inconceivable that he could have attained to im- mortality in sin and guilt by eating of the tree of life. Hence these words also must be taken in an ironical sense, as expressive of God’s view of man’s unutterable folly, in that he had forfeited his immortality, so that not even the tree of life could restore it. Nor is this inconsistent with what immediately follows: “Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken.” For this word “Therefore” in the Hebrew is simply the conjunction “ And;” in fact, it ought to have been so rendered here. But if the present rendering be retained, which it may bear, it connects what follows, not with the words which immediately precede it, but with the whole previous transaction of the sin and fall of man, for which, evidently, as the all-controlling reason, he was expelled from the blissful abode of his innocence, Further, it is to be observed, that the paradise in which our first parents had hitherto lived, and which had been to them the symbol and outward reflection of their inno- cent and happy life, could not be a suitable abode for their sinful nature, upon which had come the judgments of labor and sorrow and death. From this they must needs be excluded; and it was even more necessary that they should now be prohibited from eating of that sacred tree which was the sacrament and symbol of their obedience by their own agency to the authoritative guidance of the wis- THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE PART dom of God, not lest they should thereby attain to immor- tality in sin, which is inconceivable, but because they had forfeited forever all claim to the blessings which it repre- sented, and, for them to touch it with their polluted hands, would be a profanation of holy things. Also, they needed to be powerfully instructed and admonished that their life of innocence, now lost, could never be recovered ; that it would be worse than in vain for them to linger around that tree, longing to retrace their steps and to undo what could never be undone; that they must now go forth into a world full of thorns and thistles, and must submit them- selves to all the evils which they have brought upon them- selyes by their sin, in order that they may learn by bitter experience how inadequate to distinguish between good and evil is the guide of life which they have chosen, and may have their minds wholly turned to that new way of being saved from their sins which has been symbolically opened before them in the sacrifice of the innocent animals, in whose skins they have now been clothed by the hand of God. In these considerations we must find the true reasons for what is expressed in the words: “And the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken: and He drove out the man, and placed at the east of the garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword which turned every way to keep the way of the tree of life.” The question now comes before us, what is there in all this which is of universal significance? What are the truths for man as such which are here represented or symbolized ? Let us observe, then, that the life of man hitherto had been one of perfect innocence by the obedience of his own agency, in which he was fully justified by the works of the law to which he was amenable. But now that life was lost, so that it could never be recovered. For innocence, once lost, can never be restored, because it consists in never 216 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE having sinned. The saints in glory, who “have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb,” are not and never can become innocent, for it can never be true that they have not sinned. Hence the truth for man as such which is here symbolized is, that he can never regain his lost spiritual life by the obedi- ence of his own agency—can never again be justified by his works under the Divine law. That way of life is for- ever closed up against him, and all his efforts in that direction must forever prove worse than in vain. The principal reasons why this is so are the following : First, that which has just been given, namely, that, in the nature of the case, innocence, once lost, can never be regained. The second is, that sin, as elsewhere we -have seen, requires an atonement in which the innocent must suffer for the guilty, and which self-evidently the sinner cannot make for his own sins. But this truth has been sufficiently exhibited in previous connections, and need not be further developed here. The third reason is, that sin defiles, perverts, depraves, corrupts and renders diseased the moral nature and faculties of the sinner, and thus vitiates all his subsequent agency, so that he is no longer capable of rendering thereby an acceptable obedience to the Divine law. It defiles the inmost spiritual nature of the agent himself, which is the source of all his acts, whether of thought, affection, or will, and thus defiles all the streams which flow from this fountain. It perverts the nature of the vine, and hence all the branches and fruits of the vine are perverted. It: corrupts the heart out of which are the issues of life, and hence the whole life is corrupted. It paralyzes the spiritual will, which is the inmost centre of personality, and hence all that depends upon the will is vitiated. And it blinds the intellect to the discernment and knowledge of invisible, supersensual, spiritual and Divine things, whence it becomes filled with errors and delusions. In fine, this reflex influence of sin, THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE ue as we have seen, renders the sinner, left to his own agency, ever more and more sinful; it originates a progress in cor- ruption which, left to itself, naturally runs on forever. Now, whatever metaphysical objection may be urged against. this doctrine of sin, there is no doubt but. that it is perfectly Scriptural. For everywhere in the Word it is either assumed, or explicitly taught, that sin is not that alone which depends upon the sinner’s own moral actions, and for which he is personally and individ- ually responsible. This notion connects itself with an undue and over-development of the principle of individ- ualism in modern times. It leaves out of view the sub- stantial unity of human nature, and the organic relations of individuals with each other in families, communities, nations and the race itself, whereby children become par- takers of the good and evil of their parents, and all men of the sin which originated in him from whom they are descended. Consequently, it does not exhaust the Scrip- tural conception of sin, which represents it as an inher- ited spiritual disease, a malady, a poison, such that it is not forgiveness alone which the sinful soul needs, though that be indispensable, but also spiritual healing, the resto- ration of the health of the soul. For Christ represents himself, not only as expiating human guilt, and obtaining forgiveness for men, but also as the great and only Physi- cian of the soul. Thus, in the words which He applies to himself: “They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.” Also His miracles of physical healing have always been recognized as symbols and mani- festations of His vocation and power to heal the soul of the malady of sin. This doctrine of sin runs through the whole Scripture from beginning to end, and is often expressed, as in such passages as the following: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me... Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.” 10 918 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE But it stands out most prominently, as might be expected, in the writings of the apostle Paul, from which a multi- tude of statements in proof might be cited, many of which admit of no other intelligible meaning. Among these are the following: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed where there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. .. By one man’s offense death reigned. ... Through the offense of one many be dead...In Adam all die... By the offense of one judgment came upon all men unto condemnation... By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners...I was alive without the law once, but when the commandment came sin revived, and I died... Sin taking occasion by the commandment deceived me, and by it slew me...wrought in me all manner of concupiscence.” Now it seems impossible fairly to inter- pret such declarations as these without recognizing that what is here called “sin” is a moral corruption in the agent himself which lies back of all his moral actions, and from which they all do proceed. This last reason, if there were no other, is enough to evince that it is utterly impossible for the sinner to be jus- tified by his own works, to return to spiritual life, to secure his own salvation, by his own agency. Man cannot save himself. The delusion that this is somehow possible is the heart and substance of that which St. Paul so strenuously combats under the form of justification by the works of the law: and he is thus strenuous and impassioned, because it is one of the hardest of all things for the sinner to become convinced that, although some of his sins may be “more heinous in the sight of God than others,” it is impossible for him, in his own strength, to do anything which is not tainted and defiled with sin, or which does not bring him THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 919 still more under the Divine displeasure. Yet it is indis- pensable to his salvation that he should be brought to de- spair of his ownagency. For without this he remains blind to the knowledge of what that is from which he needs to be saved, and of what salvation truly is. Hence he looks to Christ as having procured forgiveness for him, rather than as his Saviour from sin itself. He thinks that, if he will do about as well as he can, the Lord will forgive him for matters of human infirmity wherein he may come short of his whole duty. But as well might one whose vitals a cancer is eating away be satisfied with a surgeon who re- moves some of its branches, or mitigates its symptoms, and tells him that he will forgive him the operation necessary to eradicate it from his system. Such forgiveness can do him no good—the disease wi!1 destroy him all the same. Also, in this delusion, the sinner is always striving to excuse himself, to convince himself and others that he js not so very much to blame. As well might he try to excuse himself for having taken poison—such excuses can give him no relief—what he needs is an antidote, Excuse, or even pardon itself for all his transgressions, though an- nounced to him by the voice of God from heaven , cannot benefit him in the least without the reconciliation of his heart to God in love, and the purification and renovation of his spiritual nature—without the restoration of the per- fect image of God in his soul. And whenever such for- giveness becomes the chief object of desire and seeking, to the exclusion of deliverance from sin itself, it is made an idol which can hardly fail to bring its deluded worshipper “to shame and everlasting contempt.” Until the sinner is brought to despair of his own agency, to feel that he is indeed “without strength,” and is thus emptied of self-righteousness and self-trust, which is only another word for self-conceit, he is always lingering at the gate of paradise, from which he has been irrecoverabl y expelled, striving in vain to re-enter it, to return to the 220 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE tree of life, that he may save himself by eating of its fruit. Hence he is in no wise prepared, or in a state of mind in which it is possible for him to receive that new life which is already prepared for him, and which is exhibited to our faith in such declarations as the following: “The Lord our righteousness....In the Lord have I righteousness , and strength.... Ye are in Christ who has been made unto us wisdom from God and righteousness and sanctifi- cation and redemption. ... Christ is in you.... The riches of the glory of this mystery.... which is Christ in you the hope of glory.... Ye are the temple of the living God. ... The Spirit of God dwelleth in you....I am the vine, ye are the branches.... Ye are the body of Christ... . If any man have not the spirit of Christ he is none of His.... He that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit [with Him]....Itis God which worketh in you both to will and todo of His good pleasure.... Because I live ye shall live also....1 can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me....It is not I that live, but Christ that liveth in me.” Now the spiritual life which is represented in a vast multitude of such Scriptures as these is different from, and immeasurably exalted above that of man’s original inno- cence ; wherein we have, in part at least, the fulfilment of the declaration: “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” For that life of innocence depended upon man’s own agency, in which he was created mutable and fallible, so that it could be, as it was, forfeited and lost : whereas this new life depends not at all upon the fallibility of man’s discernment between good and evil, nor upon the mutability of his will. That way of life was tried with man in his estate of innocence, and even then it failed ; much more would it fail now in his fallen and sinful state. The simple guidance of the wisdom of God in choosing between good and evil, having proved itself insufficient in such favorable circumstances, must needs prove much more in- THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 991 sufficient now that to follow this guidance man has no strength, no will, no desire. Now he needs a wisdom, a susceptibility, a will, a strength—in one word, an agency —which is not his own, yet united to, revealed in, and become one with his own agency, to choose and obey in and for him. Consequently, this new life is made to depend essentially upon the wisdom and will, the obedience and righteousness—the agency—of Christ in man, wherein He is infallible and immutable, so that this life can never be forfeited nor lost. For it is Christ in man who chooses and obeys for him, of which man’s obedience, whether of thought, affection, volition, or act, is the consequence, fruit and manifestation. Thus it is that the Christ of God brings into man his own all- perfect and “everlasting righteousness.” Here, now, we have brought out the grand significance of the “new covenant,” as distinguished from that rela- tion to God under which man lived in innocence, and from all forms and stages of the legal dispensation inaugu- rated through the mediation of Moses. It is to this that David refers in his last words as follows: “ He hath made an everlasting covenant with me ordered in all things and sure;” and this is the meaning of a vast multitude of other Scriptural deliverances, such as the following: “TI will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David....I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them to do them good.... not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers... which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith the Lord.... But I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.... 1 will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts....and they shall not depart from me....And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.... Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his 222 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE counsel, confirmed it by an oath.... And because He could swear by none greater, He sware by himself.... That by two immutable things [His promise and oath] in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation who have fled for refuge to the hope set before us.” Then, as if He could never say enough to establish the certainty of these promises of His new covenant, He compares them to the unchangeableness and stability of his ordinances and laws in the natural world. In fine, we must understand that it was in full view of all these promises and counsels of God that our Lord instituted the sacrament of the Holy Supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood which is shed for you; do you all drink of it.” Thus it appears that what renders this new life unchange- ably secure to all “the heirs of promise,” is what has been called “the mystical union” of their souls with the Lord Jesus Christ. What, then, we must inquire here, is the nature of this union? or although it is one of the most profound and inscrutable mysteries of the gospel, yet we must form some conception of it, however inadequate, in order that it should become an object of our faith. In answer to this question, there can be no doubt but that this mystical union between the Divine and the human is typically represented by the incarnation, in which God was manifested in the flesh, and became one with man, in the person of Jesus Christ. For believing souls become what they are in and through Him, ‘that in all things He may have the pre-eminence ;’ and He is their elder brother, which includes the truth, that He is of the same species, or oneness of life with them, in which sense it is written: “In all things, it behoved Him to be made like unto his brethren.” Hence, as He is “the Son of God,” so are they “sons of God” in and through Him ; as He partakes of the Divine nature, so are they “ par- takers of a Divine nature” in Him; as He is one with THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE vars God, so are they one with God in Him, in the sense that “he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit” [with Him]; and as “in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” so are they “ filled with all the fulness of God” in Him. In fact, almost every expression which is used in the Scriptures to characterize Him is applied to His people as partakers of and one with Him. This makes it necessary, in order to reach anything like a true conception of this union, that we should here un- dertake to formulate a Scriptural conception of the mysti- cal person of Christ; and for this purpose we must take into consideration some things which, at first sight, may seem to be remote from the subject. Let us direct our attention, then, to the obvious fact, that all things which are known to us exist in an ascending series, one rising above another, in ever-increasing com- plexity and dignity of nature, until we come at last to that noblest and most exalted manifestation of the power and glory of God, “the man Christ Jesus.” This series com- mences, at the lowest term, with matter pure and simple, howsoever matter may be defined, or whatever conception of it may be formed. Next above this, we have the vege- table, which is of a higher degree of complexity and dig- nity, inasmuch as it is composed of matter with all its properties and laws, together with something of a more exalted nature, namely, the principle of vegetable life, whatever that may be, so that these two are combined in the unity of one and the same superior existence. At the next stage we have the animal, which is of a still higher degree of complexity and dignity, being composed of all that there is in the vegetable, z. e., matter and plant- life, together with something still superior, namely, the principle of animal life, including capacities of pleasure and pain, a certain form of consciousness, and sume of the lower mental faculties, so that these two become one in the unity of the same creature. Next above the mere animal, 224 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE in this scale of being, is man, as he came from the hands of his Maker, and as he still exists, in whom we have a yet higher degree of complexity and dignity. For man contains in himself the whole animal nature—its senses, capacities, faculties, appetites and passions—in union with a human soul endowed with reason and free-will, capable of the distinction between right and wrong, of the knowl- edge of God, of the spiritual world, and of immortality, so that these two are one in the unity of the self-same con- scious being. The crowning term of the series, involving the highest degree of complex existence and dignity’ of nature, is that of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom we must conceive as constituted by the mystical union of God with man in one personality and consciousness, according to the preceding analogies in nature, namely, those of the union of vegetable life with matter, of the animal with the vegetable, and of the human soul with the animal. Thus we see that, according to this orthodox conception of the person of Christ, He belongs, in a certain sense, to the order of nature, so that, if there had been no such being, the Divine idea which underlies and governs the whole creation would have remained incomplete and un- fulfilled. Nor is this conception more orthodox than Scriptural. For it rests upon a vast induction of state- ments and facts, which, without it, are incapable of being comprehended in harmony with each other. Among these are the following: 1. In the sacred Word there are con- stantly ascribed to Christ all those names, titles, attributes, works and worship, which, as everywhere represented, it is impious sacrilege to ascribe to any other but the one only living and true God. His prophetic name is “Im- manuel, which being interpreted is, God-with-us.” He is called “the mighty God, the Father of eternity.” He himself claims to ‘do the works, and to be honored with the honor of his Father’; and His miracles were such as could be wrought by no other but the power of God. THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 995 Now, all this is incomprehensible with any other concep- tion of Him than that of His essential and supreme divinity. 2. In closest connection with these statements, it stands recorded that He was born of a woman; that He “increased in wisdom and stature”; that He ate, drank, and slept; that He was tempted to sin; that He wept, suffered and died: all which-is incomprehensible with any other conception of Him than that of His true and proper humanity. Hence the necessity of a more general concep- tion which shall combine these two in one; and the only such conception which is possible to the human mind is that which we reach through the preceding analogies of the union of diverse elernents in the same forms of com- plex existence; namely, that Christ was both God and man, in the full consciousness of both these elements of His personality. Nor is there in all this even the appear- ance of an inconsistency. 38. Accordingly, we find Him in the gospel record constantly manifesting this dual con- sciousness both of His Divine and of His human natures, as entering into the constitution of His one and indivisible personality. Thus He expresses his God-consciousness in a multitude of such declarations as the following: “I and my Father are one.... Before Abraham was I am”; and in all His miracles : also He expresses His consciousness of being a man in all such as these: “Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heayen, neither the Son, but my Father only.... Ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth”; and in all His merely human actions. At the same time, He uses the personal pronoun I, as representing and expressing the indi- visible unity of His person and consciousness, the one sub- ject of both these different classes of acts and experiences, alike with respect to those which proceed from His divin- ity and those which proceed from His humanity. He says, I do this, alike when He is working the most stupendous miracles, and when He is talking or eating with his disci- 10* 226 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ples, or walking the streets of Jerusalem. Nor should this seem strange to us, since we have in our own expe- rience what enables us to comprehend it. For wealso have a similar dual consciousness from the fact, that we are similarly constituted of two diverse elements, namely, of both a material and a spiritual nature, in consequence of which we say, I feel hunger, thirst, physical pain and pleasure, all which have their seat in, and proceed from our material nature; and, I feel remorse, reverence, awe, love to God, and the assurance of immortality, all which belong exclusively to our spiritual nature. Thus we ex- press our consciousness that what we designate by the personal pronoun I, namely, our personality, which is the subject of both these classes of diverse experiences, is one and indivisible. 4, Sametimes, moreover, one form of this dualism seems to predominate in the consciousness of Christ, and sometimes the other, which also we are enabled to comprehend from our own experience. For we may be in such an agony of physical pain as to overshadow and almost, or quite, extinguish the consciousness of our spirit- ual and immortal nature, and we may be in such rapture of spiritual exaltation and vision of spiritual things that the objects of sense will disappear, and physical pain, how- ever severe, will cease to be felt. The saints and martyrs appear to have experienced this latter state, what time they were “in the spirit,” and ‘heard unspeakable words which it was not lawful for a man to utter, not knowing whether they were in or out of the body,’ and when they stood in the midst of the flames with radiant countenances. Thus, also, our Lord seems to express only the consciousness of His Divine nature in the scenes of His transfiguration, and in the words already referred to: “Before Abraham was I am”; whilst this Divine consciousness seems to be over- shadowed, and thrown into the back-ground, by that of his feeble, dependent and suffering humanity, as expressed in the words: “My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 997 death”, and when, in the agony of the cross, He cried out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Now, this discernment of the person of Christ, in whom His people are typically represented, will enable us to comprehend, at least in an equal degree, the mystery of their union with God in Him. We must observe, how- ever, that it is expressed in different ways, as being with Christ immediately, or mediately through the indwelling of His Holy Spirit. Sometimes these two ideas are given separately, as in the words: “If the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall quicken your mortal bodies also through that Spirit which dwelleth in you.... Know ye not your own selves [Are ye so ignorant of what ye yourselves are as not to know] how that Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates.” In other passages they seem to be synthesized, as in the following case: “Ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now, if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His: and if the Spirit of Christ be in you, the body is dead unto sin, but the Spirit is life unto righteousness.” In fact these two forms of expres- sion are hardly distinguishable from each other as to their practical significance ; and they may easily be combined in one conception, namely, that of the union of the soul with the Holy Spirit, and thereby with Christ himself, to whom that Spirit was given without measure. ‘Thus, as the natural or Adamic man is constituted by the vital union of the animal nature with a human soul, so we must con- ceive of the new or spiritual man as constituted in his per- sonality by the vital union of the Spirit of God and of Christ with his soul, so that these two become one, as the branches are one with the vine, as the members of a human body are one with their head, and as the body itself is one with its soul. Further, this union is copiously illustrated in the Scrip- 228 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE tures by various images and analogies, such as those which have just been referred to. One of these is that of mar- riage, where the church is represented as “the Bride, the Lamb’s wife...adorned for her husband ;” and as in the words of St. Paul: “The husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church. Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands. ... Husbands, love your Wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it... . For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. ... This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the church.” Now this image is frequently employed in the Old Testament to exhibit the relation which then subsisted between God and his people; for which reason, and because it represents important practical consequences, it seems to have been carried over into the new dispensation. But inasmuch as it is common to both dispensations, we shall find it altogether inadequate to set forth the final perfection of that oneness of Christ with his people which is consummated in and through his incarna- tion, and the indwelling in them of His Holy Spirit in such fulness as was never before known. For such expression of it, we must look mainly to those analogies which are peculiar to the New Testament. The first of these is given us in the words of the Lord; “Iam the true vine:...ye are the branches... Abide in me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye except ye abide in me..,. He that abideth in me and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit. For without me ye can do nothing.” All this is very significant. For the life of the branches is not only similar to, and derived from, but it is numerically and identically one and. the same with that of the vine, which implies that this union between Christ and his people is such that their spiritual life is not barely similar to, and derived from, but that it THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE 999 is altogether one and the same with His life. The very life of Christ itself flows into and lives in them. Hence the force of his reasoning in that peculiar form of expres- sion: “ Because I live ye shall live also.” Another of these analogies is contained in the union which subsists between the human head and its body, as in the statements: “The head of every man is Christ.... Christ is the head of the church, and himself is the Saviour of the body....And He hath given Him to be the head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.’ Still another is that of the union of the body with its members: “ For as the body is one and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ.... Now ye are the body of Christ, and. members in particular.” Both of these images are frequently employed, and to the development and application of them St. Paul devotes the whole of a long chapter in his first epistle to the Corin- thians. They exhibit the same unity of life in Christ and his people which is so graphically pictured in that of the vine and its branches; and, therefore, we may pass them without further comment, in order to consider more par- ticularly that which is to follow. For there is yet another image to which we must give special attention, namely, that of the union of the soul and body, as contained in the words: “ There is one Spirit and one body,” and in all those passages which have been suf- ficiently exhibited in the examples previously cited, in which-the Lord’s people are represented as His body, and He as their indwelling and animating Spirit. The signifi- cance of these becomes apparent when we consider that, as the human body is not so solid or dense as to exclude the. soul from any of its organs or members, so the very sub- stance of the soul itself is not so dense or solid but that, in all its faculties and their functions, it can be permeated, animated, inspired and actuated by the Spirit of God. 250 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE And this is just what takes place in this mystical union between Christ and His people. What the soul is to the body of the natural man, Christ is to the soul of the spirit- ual man; as the soul in the body, so Christ in the soul. This is true of all the different faculties or powers of the soul, so that when the union is perfected, it becomes “ filled with all the fulness of God.” 1. Thus, the intellectual faculties are illuminated with the knowledge and wisdom of Christ, “who is made unto us wisdom from God,” with respect to the things of the invisible and spiritual world, and, especially, the things which pertain to himself as our Saviour. These are no longer dim, shadowy, uncertain, as they are to the natural man; but they have now a clear- ness and certainty, an all-controlling and life-moulding power, unknown before. In fact, all things are now seen, not with the man’s own eyes, but, so to speak, through the eyes of Christ, in the light in which He sees them, and as He represents them in His word. Thus are fulfilled such promises and declarations as the following: “The Para- clete, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you.... When He, the Spirit of truth, is come,... He shall guide you into all the truth.... He shall receive of mine, and shall disclose it unto you.... Ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all things. ... The anoint- ing which ye have received from Him abideth in you, and ye have no need that any one teach you; but as the same anointing teacheth you'concerning all things, and is true and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, abide ye in Him.... We have the mind [vody] of Christ.” 2. In like manner, through this union, the spiritual man is made a partaker of the susceptibilities and affections of Christ; is moved by what moves Him, affected by what affects Him, feels as He feels, loves what He loves, and hates what He hates; in which sense it is written: “'The love of God is THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE OST shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.... Ye are partakers of the sufferings of Christ....I rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church.” 3. In fine, the will of Christ unites itself and becomes one with the human will, so that the acts of the two, in the degree in which this union is perfected, are indistinguishable from each other in the consciousness. The man is conscious of his own will, as distinct from his Lord’s, in so far only as it is manifested in self-assertion and insubordination of the human to the Divine. Thus the volitions and actions of the new man are literally those of the will of Christ in him. Hence the exhortation of the holy apostle: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleas- ure.” | The practical consequences of this mystical union between Christ and our souls cannot be less than of supreme im- portance. In fact, our whole salvation, both our justifica- tion and sanctification, and “all things which pertain to life and godliness,” depend upon and proceed from it. With respect to our justification, it has been defined in all the reformed communions substantially alike, as “an act of God’s free grace, wherein He pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in His sight only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone ;” and commonly it has been explained in the sense that we are regarded and treated as being righteous in virtue of Christ’s righteousness imputed to us as if it were our own. But this has always been a stumbling- block to thoughtful people, who could not help asking, how is it conceivable that God, who only sees all things as they are, should regard us as being, in point of right- eousness, altogether different from what we are? How can the righteousness of one be imputed to another, as if 232 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE it were his own? Now the preceding analogies suggest something in our own experience which enables us to answer these questions and to solve these difficulties. For we do not regard, nor treat, nor even think of a vegetable organism with respect to the lower element of its nature, the mere matter which enters into its composition, but we regard, treat and think of it with reference to the higher element of its complex nature—as being truly and prop- erly a vegetable. In like manner, we do not treat an animal as being in part composed of a vegetable, but alto- gether according to the higher element of its nature ; it is the object of our thoughts simply as an animal. Nor do we think of a man with reference to the animal which he contains in himself, but we characterize him by, and treat him according to the nobler element of his complex na- ture, as a being endowed with reason and free-will. If we should do otherwise, we should account ourselves as irrational ; for he who treats a man as if he were an animal is himself a brute. And, in all this, we think and act according to the image or likeness of God in which we are created ; for this is just what God does in the matter of our justification ; He regards and treats us, not according to our lower and sinful nature, but according to ‘the Di- vine nature of which we are partakers.’ He does not impute sin to us, because this is confined to our lower nature; but He imputes to us the merits and righteous- ness of Christ, because Christ is in us, and has become one with us. He sees only Christ in us because Christ is in us, and one with us; which determines our true character and standing before Him, just as we see only the vegetable, the animal, the man, the nobler and characteristic elements in these complex existences. It is only in this way that we can comprehend St. Paul where he boldly identifies him- self with the new man, and relegates his remaining sinful - ness to his flesh, his members, as in the following sublime passage: “ For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, aa THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE ae dwelleth no good thing.... For that which I do, I allow not.... But what I hate, that I do.... If, then, I do that which I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.... For I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin in my members.... So, then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God.” Here, also, we discern the meaning of those puzzling words of the beloved disciple: ‘‘ Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not.... Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, because His seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, be- cause he is born of God.” But St. Paul could not rest in mere justification—he still regarded himself as chained to a dead body—whilst this law of sin remained in his members. Hence he cries out, “ O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death ?” and he answers his own question in the words: “I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord [I shall be delivered].” Here, then, with respect to our sanctification, we must observe, that it depends upon, and proceeds from, our union with Christ, no less than our justification. for it is only through this that ‘ He is made unto us righteousness and sanctification and redemp- tion.” Thus only are the perfections of His character and life reproduced in us, and we become partakers of His holiness. Thus, not only do His views of all things be- come our views, but His love of the truth becomes love of the truth in us; His faith, faith in us; His meekness and submission to His Father’s will, meekness and submission to the Father’s will in us; His strength to resist tempta- tion, strength to resist temptation in us; His obedience and . righteousness, obedience and righteousness in us; His un- selfishness and self-sacrifice, unselfishness and self-sacrifice in us; His love to God and man, love to God and man in us; His holiness, holiness in us; and His immortality and 234 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE glory, immortality and glory in us. Such is the grand significance of the declaration which the beloved disciple makes in the commencement of his gospel ; “Of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace;” and thus is accomplished the glorious object for which He came into the world, as stated by the prophet Daniel, “To finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for inquity, and to bring in everlasting right- eousness.” | Such, then, is the new relation of the believing soul to God in Christ, and such is the immutable security of the new life which rests upon and proceeds from it. Hence this new life required very different symbols and sacra- ments from those which were appropriate to man’s former life of innocence and obedience by his own agency in choos- ing between good and evil. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life, the sacraments of that -lost life, would now be altogether inappropriate and mis- leading. rom the moment in which he sinned, man must look to very different symbols of the way in which only it is now possible that he should be saved. In the agony and shed blood of the innocent victim, in its flesh con- sumed by fire upon the altar of God, in the washing with water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, in eating and drinking bread and wine as emblems of the body and blood of Christ broken and shed for him, given unto and received by him, and inseparably identified with him—in these symbols he must now find represented his spiritual baptism into the death of Christ unto sin, and his resurrection unto the new life of Christ in him, so that he may be able to say with Paul: “I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh is by the faith of the Son of God.” For, in order to his reception of this new life, every hope resting on the obedience of his own agency must be rooted out of his THE EXPULSION FROM PARADISE VO heart, otherwise he will not and cannot humble himself to receive salvation by the obedience and righteousness of another for and in him. It is only upon the crushed ruins of his own agency that the temple of this new life can be edified in his soul. Hence, when he committed his first sin, he was powerfully warned against all attempts to return to the life he had irrecoverably lost, by the cherubim and flaming sword which were placed at the entrance of the garden of Eden “to keep the way of the tree of life;” and by that flaming sword must every one, from that day to this, who seeks to be justified by his own works, to walk by his own light, to obey by hts own agency, to live by his own life, be slain and consumed. Thus, we see, in fine, that the immutable security of this new life results from the fact that it does not depend on man’s fallible agency in the discrimination and choice between good and evil, but on that of Him who has be- come one with His people, and whose wisdom cannot err, whose faith cannot fail, and whose spiritual strength is adequate to all emergencies. And this may enable us to understand why it is that, when this symbol of the tree of life appears once more at the close of the Apocalyptic conflicts—the humanity now saved from all sin—it stands in the midst of the New Jerusalem, on the banks of the river of life, which flows forth eternally out of the throne of God and the Lamb, and there stands beside it no longer, as in the paradise of man’s innocence, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. XIII THE HOLY SABBATH And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made: and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made: and God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made. THE institution of the Sabbath, as here represented in the Mosaic record of the creation, has given rise to many questions of great and permanent interest, some of which hardly admit of answers that can be regarded as altogether satistactory. One very serious difficulty is involved in the reason here given for the sanctification of the seventh day, namely, that in it God rested after His six days’ work of creation, which seems to imply that these six days were similar in kind and length to the seventh. For otherwise how could the seven days be enumerated together without a violation of the necessary laws of analytic thought? Yet no person of intelligence now believes that the world was actually created in six literal days. Here, then, we have natural objects, which the sacred writers always rep- resented in forms of expression current in their times, so interlinked with moral and spiritual truth that it seems almost impossible to separate them—the truth itself seems to depend upon antiquated conceptions of such objects— the institution and sanctification of the Sabbath upon the creation of the world in six literal days. Nor does this diffi- culty arise from any peculiar views of the relations be- tween revelation and science, but it is one which all alike must face and deal with as best they can, except such as 236 THE HOLY SABBATH 237 can still believe that God created all things in six days each of twenty-four hours’ length; which, to those who are at all acquainted with the evidence on the subject, is about as easy as it is to believe that the sun revolves around the earth, or that the earth itself rests upon the back of the great Hindoo tortoise. But passing this difficulty, and leaving every one to deal with it in his own way, if now we undertake to draw from these statements of Moses the moral and spiritual truth which they contain, we shall find that it can hardly be less, and may be more, than that God blessed and sanctified one day in seven on the ground of something in himself which is here characterized as His resting after His work of crea- tion. Whatsoever of truth more than this may be con- tained in the record we leave to be evolved by others who have a deeper spiritual insight, for in this one we shall find more than we can Pee elucidate. Here, then, it seems to be clearly revealed that the oa bath is not an institution of a positive, limited, or tem- porary character, but that it rests upon or abode a moral law, that is, a law of universal and immutable ob- ligation. In confirmation of this view we submit the following considerations. The first of these is that which stands out on the record itself, namely, that the Sabbath was instituted at the crea- tion of the world, and thus established in the life of the first human beings from whom all mankind were to de- scend. For we cannot rationally conceive of God’s bless- ing and sanctifying a particular day as something which He kept secret at the time—which He did not communi- cate to those for whom this blessing and sanctification were intended: nor can we understand the words, “God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it,” otherwise than that He commanded it to be kept holy that it might be a blessing. Accordingly we have abundant evidence that the division of time into weeks of seven days extensively prevailed in 238 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the earliest ages—that it was known, not only among the Hebrews and other Arabic or Semitic nations, but also among the Egyptians, Greeks, Africans, Peruvians, and almost or quite all primitive peoples. The Greeks as- cribed its origin, as also that of many other traditional customs for which they could not otherwise account, to the Egyptians. Periods of seven days are mentioned in con- nection with the Noachian deluge, both in the Bible and in the Assyrian and Babylonian arrowhead inscriptions, which last inform us of several interesting particulars on this subject which do not appear in the Mosaic record, such as that the rain ceased and the ark rested on the sum- mit of the mountain both on seventh days. Also they afford unequivocal evidence that the Sabbath itself was known and reverenced by the ancient Babylonians, and that they regarded it as having been established by God at the creation of the world.* This division of time was certainly known to the patriarchs of Abraham’s family, for it is recognized in the account of Jacob’s= marriage with Leah and Rachel as something well understood, and needing no explanation. In asimilar manner, also, it is alluded to in the book of Job, to which an Arabian origin and a date anterior to Moses have been probably assigned. Moreover, that the Sabbath itself was fully recognized as a Divine institution among the Israelites before the deca- logue was promulgated is evident from the account which * On the fifth tablet of the Chaldean account of the creation we find the words: On the seventh day He [the Creator] appointed a holy day, And to cease from all business He commanded, Also in the Babylonian calendar the seventh day is designated as the “ Sabbath,”’—the word literally signifying “a day on which it is unlawful to work:” and, among other prescribed observances, it appears that the king was not allowed to drive in his chariot nor to exercise either his leg- islative or military functions on that day. See Records of the Past, published under the sanction of the Society of Biblical Archeology (British), Vol. vii. page 164; ix. 118. THE HOLY SABBATH 239 is given of the manna. For they were supplied with this “‘angel’s food” whilst they were yet in “ the wilderness of Sin,’ some time before they came to Mount Sinai; and it did not fall on the seventh day, but they were commanded to gather a double portion of it on the sixth, the reason for which Moses gives in these words: “This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath: and on the morrow he said: “To-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord, to-day ye shall not find it in the field.” Notwithstanding, some of them went out to look for it on that day, and were severely rebuked for their un- belief and disobedience : “And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days: abide ye every man in his place; let no man go out of his place on the Sabbath-day.” Also, that it was pre- viously known among the children of Israel may be fairly inferred from the words with which the fourth command- ment begins: “Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy.” For this expression is in no wise appropriate to the promulgation of a new law, nor to the setting up of an absolutely new institution. Again, the universal and immutable obligation of the Sabbath is revealed and enforced by the reason here as- signed for its sanctification, which is more fully expressed in the command of the decalogue: “Remember the Sab- bath-day to keep it holy: six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath- day, and hallowed it.” And this reason is still further 240 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE unfolded and emphasized in the words: “On the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.” Here, indeed, we are brought face to face with a Divine mystery—something in God which is quite incomprehensible to us. But none the less, perhaps all the more, is it a reason for the institution and observance of the Sabbath which can never lose its force, and is of universal application. For it is not any- | thing in man, nor in the times nor countries in which his lot may be cast, nor in any other circumstances, in all which he is mutable, but it is something in God himself, of which ‘His resting and being refreshed’ is the anthro- pomorphic yet true expression, and which must remain unchangeably the same for all men, in all times, countries, and other circumstances. Here, then, we have it revealed to our faith that there is something, however mysterious, in the nature or attributes of God upon which the Sabbath is founded, to which it corresponds, and which it manifests to us. Hence, whatever force or validity this reason had for the people of Israel in the time of Moses it must have had from the creation of man upon the earth, and ever since, and must continue to have in all future times for all mankind. Until that shall cease to be true which is signified by God’s resting after He had finished His work of creation, the obligation to keep holy the day which He has appointed to commemorate His rest, which is founded on and arises out of it, can never cease—not even in heaven, where, as we are expressly informed in the New Testament, “there remaineth [with whatsoever modifica- tions from different circumstances] a Sabbath-keeping to _the people of God.” A third consideration which we cannot pass lightly over is, that the ordinance of the Sabbath is one of the ten great commandments which were spoken by the voice of God himself out of the midst of cloud and flame on the summit of Mount Sinai, and which He wrote with His own finger on tables of stone for a perpetual memorial. THE HOLY SABBATH 241 We must now endeavor to elucidate the significance of these facts. For what reason, then, are we to understand that these commandments were distinguished in such a remarkable manner from all the rest of the Mosaic law? The ne- cessary and obvious answer is, for their superior importance. They were not communicated through the intervention or mediation of any created being, howsoever plenarily in- spired, but were spoken by the mouth of God himself in thunder-words to the many thousands of Israel assembled at the foot of the mountain, to signify their paramount importance, as being a transcription from, and an immediate expression of the nature and character of God, in whose image or likeness man had been created, and consequently as being of universal and immutable obligation, in order that by keeping them he might be conformed to the char- acter of his Maker. And still further to symbolize, rep- resent, express and enforce the truth, that their obligation could never cease, that they could never be superseded by any future revelation or higher law, they were written by the finger of God on tablets of stone, the most imperishable and unchangeable of all material which could be employed for this purpose. The other portions of the Mosaic law were not so delivered, but were communicated through the mediation of Moses, and were recorded on perishable ma- terials, such as papyrus, the leaf of a plant, which was the paper then in use, to signify that they were not of equal importance—were not of immutable and universal obliga- tion, but were binding on the people of Israel alone, and on them only for a time—that they were destined to be superseded and done away by a subsequent and more com- plete revelation. Such is the plain and obvious significance of this distinction between the decalogue and the rest of the law, in the mode of their delivery and in the material on which they were recorded. This view of the duties enjoined in the decalogue is il- 242 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE lustrated and confirmed when we consider them in par- ticular. For in them God prohibits the worship of false gods, idolatry, Sabbath-breaking, profane swearing, false witness-bearing, dishonoring of parents, adultery, murder, theft and covetousness, and enjoins the opposites of these as duties which we owe to Himand toeach other. Nowall these, unless the Sabbath be an exception, are undeniably matters of universal and immutable obligation, and essential to human welfare alike in all times, places and circumstances. There has never been any dispute upon this point, but they have been universally regarded as embodying the unchange- able principles of morality—principles which do not even depend upon the will of God, except as His will is the ex- pression of His all-perfect moral character and holy nature, which is the ultimate standard of eternal righteousness. With all reverence be it said, God himself cannot make it right for His moral creatures to violate any of these laws, unless that of the Sabbath be an exception, for this would require Him to deny His own nature from which they are transcribed. Can He make it right for any one to dis- honor and abuse his own parents? Can He make adultery or murder right? No one in his senses can believe it— and so of all the rest. Now, since all the other commandments of the decalogue are thus demonstrably of immutable obligation, the question arises, if that of the Sabbath be of a totally different char- acter, for what conceivable reason was it placed among them, spoken with them. by the voice of God from the summit of Mount Sinai, and inscribed by His own hand upon tables of stone? If it was to be obligatory upon none but the children of Israel, and on them only fora time, why was it not communicated to them through the mediation of their human legislator along with the other precepts of that law which was destined to be superseded and abolished by a subsequent and more perfect revelation? It may be safely affirmed that no rational answer ever has THE HOLY SABBATH 243 been, or ever can be, given to this question; and the in- evitable conclusion is, that the law of the Sabbath was re- garded by Him who delivered it as of the same character with the rest of the ten commandments, as transcribed from His own immutable nature, as of permanent and universal obligation, and as equally with them essential to the well- being and happiness of mankind. He who thinks other- wise is bound in reason to give a satisfactory answer to the question which has just been asked, as, also, it has been well observed, to do three other things: 1. ‘To show where the same authority by which the fourth command- ment was enjoined and engraved on the stone tablet has abrogated or revoked it ; 2. To show that no other of the ten : or if any other which, or why this one alone, has been an- nulled and erased; 3. To reform his own and the lan- guage of Christendom which has prevailed for two thousand years, so that we shall no more speak of the decalogue, or ten commandments, since, upon this supposition, there are only nine.’ Nor is it any objection to this conclusion that the Sabbath is frequently spoken of as a sign between God and His peculiar people by which they were placed under special obligations to serve Him ; for, ina precisely similar manner, their deliverance from Egyptian bondage is given as a reason why they should keep all His commandments, but it does not follow from this that other people are under no similar obligation. We are now prepared to consider our Lord’s deliverances on this subject, and to appreciate their true significance. For it has been maintained—and it seems to be a common opinion—that he by his Divine authority greatly relaxed its rigor, if he did not virtually abrogate the law of the Sabbath. But this notion has arisen from the want of close attention to what He actually says on the subject in its connections, and is a possible one only to those who fail to appreciate what has just been stated with respect to the unchangeable morality of the decalogue. 244 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE On several occasions, then, our Saviour was accused, mostly by those who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees, of breaking the Sabbath himself, and of allowing his dis- ciples to break it. How does He answer them? Certainly not by denying its immutable obligation, but by convicting his accusers of having misunderstood and perverted it, and of gross inconsistency in their manner of observing it. Thus, when his hungry disciples on the Sabbath had plucked the ears of corn out of the fields to eat, “the Phar- isees said unto Him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath-day.” But He justified them by showing that such things as were demanded by human necessity were lawful on that day, and that the Pharisees had perverted it from its original object. He referred them to the example of David, their most eminent saint and greatest national hero, who with his followers had eaten the shew-bread from the tabernacle, and were justi- fied by their necessity, although, apart from such necessity, it was iawful for the priests only to eat that bread. Then he called their attention to the work which had to be done by the priests in the temple-service, which the Pharisees themselves held to be lawful on the Sabbath. Thus he laid open their inconsistency, and themselves to the rebuke: “Tf ye had known what that meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guilt- less.” Also, on the occasion of his healing a man with a withered hand, the Pharisees asked Him: “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath-day? that they might accuse Him. And He said unto them, What man shall there be among’ you that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath-day, will not lay hold on it and pull it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Where- fore, it is lawful to do well [to do good] on the Sabbath- day.” Ona similar occasion: “ Behold, there was a man before Him which had the dropsy, and Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers [interpreters of the law] and “THE HOLY SABBATH DAB Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath-day ? And they held their peace. And He took him and healed him and let him go, and answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the Sabbath-day? And they could not answer him again to these things.” In fine, when ke was accused of breaking the Sabbath because He had healed “a woman which had a spirit of infirmity,” He replied to his accuser: “Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the Sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering? And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath-day? And when he had said these things, all his adversaries were ashamed.” And well they might be! Now, in all this He corrects the erroneous no- tions which prevailed in His time with respect to the man- ner in which the Sabbath ought to be sanctified ; He shows that works of necessity and mercy and such as pertained to the worship cf God were lawful on that day; but He does not even allude to the abrogation nor to any relaxa- tion of its immutable obligation as enjoined in the deca- logue. On the contrary, implicitly at least, He re-affirms it by the declaration made in connection with one of the pre- vious quotations: “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man tor the Sabbath.” For this declaration was given in rebuke of the Pharisees because they had perverted the Sabbath by teaching the people that works of necessity and merey were unlawful on that day; which interpretation of the manner in which it was to be observed evidently pro- ceeded on the absurd and immoral principle, that man was made for the Sabbath: whereas the right understanding of all moral law is, that its observance must necessarily be promotive of human well-being, and that no conflict is possible between our duties and our highest interests. And 246 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE here it is to be observed, that the Lord does not only say, that ‘man was not made for the Sabbath,’ but, also, that “the Sabbath was made for man;” that is, not for Jews only, nor for the people of any particular age or country, but for man as such, in all times, places and circumstances, For although it is possible to understand the words other- wise, yet it is undeniable that they naturally bear this sense, and that it is in perfect harmony with all the other Scriptures. This, therefore, is a fair interpretation, and, so understood, this declaration affirms the universal obli- gation of the Sabbath as essential to the welfare and hap- piness of mankind. Certainly a greater perversion of the words is not conceivable than to draw from them the sense that the Lord abrogated, or in any wise relaxed the obli- gation to keep holy the Sabbath-day as enjoined in the fourth commandment. But,it may be asked, if He did not actually do anything of this kind, did He not claim for himself the power to do it in the words also spoken in connection with a previous quotation: “The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath ?” Tt must be acknowledged that at first sight this would ap- pear to be their meaning, but in scrutinizing them more closely, we must bear in mind two things: 1. That the law of the Sabbath is an integral part of the decalogue, which sets forth the eternal principles of morality as founded in the nature of God, and which He himself cannot set aside ; 2. That the object which the Lord evi- dently kept in view in all these arguments with the Phari- sees, and the only thing which He undertook to do, was to correct their perversions and abuses of the Sabbath, and to declare on His own authority how it should be sanctified. Now the sense of these words ought not to be pressed be- yond this object, and they cannot be without denying the immutable nature of the morality of the decalogue. Nei- ther is it reasonable to suppose that our Lord would assert in such an implicit manner a power to erase and annul one THE HOLY SABBATH 247 of the ten commandments and to reduce their number to nine, especially when we remember His solemn declaration: “Verily, I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.’ It is much more reasonable to understand that in this assertion of his lordship over the Sabbath, He claims no more than an absolute authority to declare and teach how it ought to be sanctified. With this understanding of His words, they may be fairly paraphrased as follows: I, the Son of man, by the same Divine authority which in- stituted the Sabbath at the creation of the world, and which promulgated the law of its observance from the summit of Mount Sinai, do now and in this way correct your misun-~ derstanding and perversions of it, and show you how you are to keep it holy; for in that sense in which it can be said that God is Lord of the moral law, “the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” Having thus seen that our blessed Lord did not abro- gate nor at all relax the obligation of the Sabbath, we can hardly anticipate that His apostles would claim authority to do anything of the kind. Hence we are enabled con- sistently to understand the only remaining passage in the New Testament which presents any difficulty. This occurs in St. Paul’s epistle to the Colossians where in our English Bible he is made to say: “ Let no man, there- fore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath-days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.” Now it is conceded on all hands that this is a very poor, and, in some respects, an incorrect translation. For in the expression, “sabbath-days,” the latter word is not in the original, but has been supplied by the translators : and the words “a holy day,” are a palpable mistranslation of a single word in the Greek which properly signifies a feast, and is so rendered in every other place where it occurs, twenty-seven in all. Literally translated, the 248 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE passage reads as follows: “Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths ; which things are a shadow of the things to come, but the body is of Christ.” Its general reference, beyond a question, is to the various typical feasts established by Moses, which the Jewish converts were still inclined to observe, whilst the gentiles neglected them, and, with respect to which, every one was left free to do as he pleased ; for they were all a shadow of which “ the body,” or substance, was the gospel “of Christ.” And as to the meaning of the word, “sabbaths,” we may ask why it is here in the plural, when all the other specifications— meat, drink, a feast, a new moon—are in the singular ? Lhe proper answer, no doubt, is, that there were several kinds of sabbaths instituted by Moses, such as that of the seventh month and that of the sabbatical year; and it is to such observances as these that the apostle chiefly refers, classing them where they properly belong with distinctions in meat and drink, new moons, and other ceremonial feasts, all of which were “a shadow of the things to come”: and this conclusion is rendered the more probable by the well-known fact, that the Jews were accustomed to call all their festivals sabbaths, because’ in observing them they rested from secular labor. But in so far as he may have had any reference to the Sabbath of the decalogue, it must have been to the observance of the seventh day along with the first, which was extensively practised by Judaiz- ing Christians. or that here there can be no allusion whatever to the first day of the week, which had now taken the place of the seventh, is conclusively proved by the fact, that it was not called the Sabbath, but “the Lord’s Day,” by the apostles and primitive Christians. If St. Paul had referred to it, he must have written: Let no man, there- fore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of the Lord’s Day. From the preceding considerations, then, we may safely THE HOLY SABBATH 249 conclude that there are still ten commandments, instead of nine only, which all alike are of eternal and immutable obligation. But other matters remain to be disposed of, the chief of which is the change just alluded to from the seventh to the first day of the week, which took place at the incoming of the new dispensation. But the difficulty of this has been greatly magnified, and we may expect it almost or quite to disappear with a little close attention to the subject. | Let us observe, then, that our Lord himself, previous to His crucifixion, undoubtedly observed what was then called the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath; and for a long time afterwards more or less sacredness was very naturally attached to that day by His followers. But from the time of His resurrection, the day of the week on which it occurred, and which according to the reckoning then received was the first, began to be observed by His disciples as the day of assemblies for public worship, the celebration of the sacraments, Christian communion, and other sacred purposes. We have abundant evidence of this in the New Testament. Now the fact, that 1t was so observed could not fail to give it the character and identify it with the Sabbath on which such assemblies had pre- viously been held. But inasmuch as there was no com- mand for the observance of two Sabbaths, that of the seventh day gradually fell into disuse, and in time was entirely superseded. It is true, indeed, that Christians did not call the first day the Sabbath, for that name had become inseparably attached to the seventh; but its ob- servance as such was altogether inevitable from the fact of its being universally recognized as the day for their wor- shipping assemblies and all other sacred purposes, and because it was impossible for them to believe that the decalogue was, or could be, abrogated. They called it “the Lord’s Day.” Yor although this expression occurs but once in the New Testament, where the apostle John iis 250 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE i telis us that he “was in the Spirit” on that day, nor does he tell us that he meant by it the first day of the week, yet we know that such was the fact, because this day was uni- versally so called by the Christians of primitive times, as, indeed, it has been ever since. Evidently the apostle in- troduced the expression as one which would be perfectly understood by all for whom he was writing, and needed no explanation. The influences which brought about this change may be further elucidated as follows: Our Lord rose from the dead on what was then called the first day of the week, and on that day, or its recurrence, invariably afterwards, He met with and showed himself to His disciples. This took place on at least five different occasions, and we have no evidence that He ever appeared on any other day. This fact naturally led them to expect Him to meet with and manifest himself to them in their worshipping assemblies on that day in preference to all others. In this way, it seems to have become appropriated to such assemblies, and was observed as the Christian Sabbath. Moreover, it was when they were so assembled on the first day of the week that the Pentecostal outpouring of the Holy Spirit took place, by which they were replenished and endowed with all spiritual gifts and graces for their great work of evan- gelizing the world. Now the influence of this eyer-mem- orable event in fixing their minds immovably on that day, as the one above all others which was appropriate for their worshipping assemblies, the preaching of the gospel, the celebration of the sacraments, the taking up of charitable collections or offerings, Christian communion, and all the other sacred purposes of the Sabbath, can hardly be over- estimated. Accordingly we find that ever afterwards it was so ob- served. Thus, when St. Paul, on one of his missionary tours, came to T'roas, he “abode seven days; and upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break THE HOLY SABBATH D1 bread [for the celebration of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper | Paul preached unto them.” With like significance he wrote to the church at Corinth which he had founded: “ Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches in Galatia, so do ye; upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store as God hath prospered him.” In like manner, we find that in the earliest and subse- quent Christian authors whose writings have come down to us, the first day of the week is accepted, and never called in question, as “the Lord’s Day,” and as devoted to religious purposes, being observed substantially as the seventh day had been under the former dispensation. This was so striking a characteristic of the early Christians that +t attracted the attention of heathen writers ; for Pliny the younger, proconsul of Bithynia, in the latter part of the first century, alludes to it in his famous report to the em- peror Trajan, where he states that the Christians of his province, whom he represents as already immensely numerous, were accustomed to meet for the worship of Christ “on astated day.” Now we know that this “ stated day ” could not have been the seventh, and consequently that it was, no doubt, the first of the week, or “ the Lord’s Day.” The first Christian author who gives us any in- formation on the subject is Justin Martyr, as he is called, who lived in the close of the first, and the early part of the second century, and who tells us that the Christians did not celebrate the Jewish festivals, nor observe their sabbaths, but that they were accustomed to assemble on the day which the heathen called Sunday, for the reading of the Scrip- tures, prayer, exhortation and communion. In the epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas, which was generally accepted as genuine at the close of the second century, and which con- sequently must have been extant in the first, the Lord is introduced addressing the Jews as follows: “The sabbaths which ye now keep are not acceptable unto me, but those 959 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE which I have made, when resting from all things I shall begin the eighth day, that is, the beginning of the other world ”—a somewhat obscure declaration, but made plain upon the point for which it is here adduced by the follow- ing continuation : “ For which cause, we [Christians] ob- serve the eighth day with gladness, in which Jesus rose from the dead, and, having manifested himself to His dis- ciples, ascended to heaven.” ‘Tertullian, also, at the close of the second century, states that “ Christians put off even their business on the Lord’s Day that they may not give place to the devil,” and adds, “ We celebrate Sunday as a joyful day.” Clement of Alexandria about the same date, says: “ A true Christian, according to the commands of the gospel, observes the Lord’s Day by casting out all evil thoughts and cherishing all goodness, honoring the resur- rection of the Lord which took place on that day.” And, in the latter part of the third, or the commencement of the fourth century, Eusebius, the church historian, gives us the following explicit and decisive testimony : “The Word, by the new covenant, translated and transferred the feast of the Sabbath to the morning light, and gave us the sym- bol of true rest, the saving Lord’s Day, the first of light, in which the Saviour obtained the victory over death ... On this day, which is the first of the Light and of the true Sun, we assemble after an interval of six days, and celebrate a holy and spiritual Sabbath: even all nations redeemed by Him throughout the whole world assemble and do those things according to the spiritual law which were decreed for the priests to do on the Sabbath. All things which it was duty to do on the Sabbath, these we have transferred to the Lord’s Day, as more appropriately belonging to it, because it has the precedence, and is first in rank, and more honorable than the Jewish Sabbath. It has been handed down to us [from the beginning, or from the apostles] that we should... do these things.” It seems hardly possible that more conclusive evidence THE HOLY SABBATH 253 should be given that the primitive church observed the first day of the week as the Sabbath of the new dispensa- tion by doing “all those things which were decreed for the priests to do,” and “ which it was duty to do, on the Sab- bath.... according to the spiritual law.” But if such evidence be possible, we find it in the Sabbath laws of the first Christian emperor and his successors. In order to appreciate this, however, we must bear in mind that the conversion of Constantine, who came to the throne of the Roman empire in the commencement of the fourth century, has been much disputed, whether it was sincere, or merely the result of his political sagacity. But however this may have been, one thing is quite certain, that in his time the Christian religion had made such progress throughout the world, that it was an eminently wise political movement on the part of that great monarch to profess and call him- self a Christian, and to enact Christian laws. Hence it follows that his Sabbath law, as far as it goes at least, must be taken as the embodiment and expression of the views which generally prevailed among Christians on the subject, and if it had not been, it certainly would have proved but a dead letter. As soon, therefore, as he found himself well settled on the throne, he began to bestow special care on the observance of the Lord’s Day. He is known to have required his armies, when not actually engaged, to spend the day in devotional exercises. He prohibited the holding of courts of judicature, and the prosecution of trials and suits at law, and the exercise of all trades and arts in the cities. But the necessary works of agriculture he permitted to go on, and all works of mercy, such as the emancipation of slaves, were held to be lawful. The pre- cise letter of the law is as follows: “Let all judges, in- habitants of cities, and artificers rest on the venerable [or sacred] Sunday. But in the country, husbandmen may freely and lawfully apply to the business of agriculture, since it often happens that the sowing of corn and planting 254 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE of vines cannot be so advantageously performed on any other day, lest by neglecting the opportunity they should lose the benefits which the Divine bounty bestows upon us.” From this legal permission, however, we cannot infer that all such labors were regarded as lawful by the church, for in this first attempt to embody Christian duties in the laws of the empire, especially when it represented such an immense change from all that had previously existed, such enactments could not be expected to go as far as the views which prevailed among Christians. Accordingly subsequent emperors confirmed and extended this rescript by prohibiting all public shows, theatrical exhibitions, dancing and other amusements; and the councils of the church, as soon as they became free to make their authority felt, decreed the strict observance of the Lord’s Day by abstinence from all secular labors, amusements and recreations, and by a faithful attendance upon Divine service. 7 Now if we try to comprehend all these things in one view, and consider how impossible it is to account for them on any other supposition, they seem to leave no room for doubt but that the holy apostles, either so instructed by the Lord whilst He remained on earth after His resur- rection, or inspired by His Holy Spirit, did teach and en- Join that the first day of the week, in place of the seventh, should be the Christian Sabbath, which should be kept holy to God by abstinence from all things prohibited on the Sabbath of the former dispensation, and by devoting it exclusively to spiritual purposes. In fact, the very name of “ the Lord’s Day,” which it is certain they gave it, necessarily implies that it was to be regarded as altogether sacred and devoted to religious observances, for how otherwise could the name have had any propriety or significance? But here the question arises, how could the apostles, or even the Lord himself, make this change when the original THE HOLY SABBATH 255 command was, that the seventh day should be the Sabbath, and since, as we have seen, the Sabbath law is one of eter- nal and immutable obligation? Now the answer to this question which we regard as perfectly satisfactory, is, that what is meant by “the seventh day” in the commandment is, one day in seven. For this sense of the words is quite as natural and good as any other; and if more than this had been intended, insuperable difficulties would have arisen from the variation to which any more closely speci- fied time is subject with every degree of longitude and latitude, and which is such that days in different places necessarily correspond to different periods of time. ‘That the apostles so understood it is certain from their having made this change, which evidently they could not have done if in their view what was then called the seventh day had been unchangeably appointed and ordained for the Sabbath. Nay, this is almost the necessary interpretation of the command itself, as in the words: “Six days shall thou labor and do all thy work, but the seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” For here there is no specification given to Moses or his people as to the particular one on which they should commence to reckon these six days. For aught that appears, they were left free to begin this reckoning any day on which they might agree, or which might be designated by their lawgiver. The command itself certainly includes no more than that the seventh day from that on which their reckoning commenced should be their Sabbath. Neither have we any reason to think that they were informed, or that Moses himself or any one else knew, which was numerically a recurrence of the seventh day from the creation of the world, or how many sevens had since elapsed. Nor do we know what determined in their minds the day on which they actually commenced this reckoning. All that we know is, that they did com- mence on a certain day, which we for that reason alone call the first day of the week, and that the seventh from it 256 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE became their Sabbath. But we do know what controlled the minds of the apostles in making this change—it was the resurrection of the Lord. On the day after that great event occurred they commenced to reckon these six days of labor, and this was the only change they made. For the seventh from that day, according to the commandment, became the Christian Sabbath, precisely as the seventh from another day had been the Jewish Sabbath. Hence it is evident that one is just as much the seventh day as the other,and might with equal propriety have been so called. Probably the reason why it was not was the fact, that the Lord rose from the dead on that day, which, as the beginning of a new’ spiritual creation, made it emi- nently fit and proper that it should continue to be the first of the week. But in neither case have we any evidence, either that the Jewish Sabbath was a recurrence of the seventh day from the creation of the world, or that the Christian Sabbath is a recurrence of the day on which the creation commenced. So slight was the change made by the holy apostles, and so all-controlling were the reasons for it that it seems almost to have taken place of itself, without criticism or comment, and as a matter of course. For no one at the time, so far as we know, objected to it—no one called at- tention to it. It passed into the life of the church as the light of the sun, in crossing the equator, passes into the life of the new regions which he comes to vivify with his all-quickening beams. And in order that the faith of the Lord’s resurrection might thus enter into and new mould the life of the world, it was eminently fitting and proper that it should be commemorated by an institution, the constant observance of which should keep it in ever- lasting remembrance. For it was the crown and seal which God placed upon His whole redemptive work, which without it would have been utterly in vain—a dead Christ could not have given life to the world. It was THE HOLY SABBATH 257 God’s seal to convince mankind that He was all He claimed to be—“He was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by His resur- rection from the dead.” By its Divine efficacy His people are raised up from death in trespasses and sins to the new life of the gospel, for which object it is no less efficacious than is His sacrificial death to expiate their guilt and reconcile them to God: “For if we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection... That like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should [be raised up from death in sin and] walk in newness of life.” And it is the pledge or earnest which God has graciously given us that we shall be raised up in the resurrection at the last day unto immor- tality and eternal glory; for ‘now is Christ risen and be- come the first fruits of them that slept... If we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.” It is in this sense that the resurrection of the Lord is the foundation of all our hopes, and thus we are enabled to say with the holy apostle in his burst of jubilation: “ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which, accord- ing to His abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead unto an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that fadeth not away.” Hence it was that, as the Jewish Sabbath had been in- stituted in commemoration of the rest of God after the creation of the world, so the Christian Sabbath was estab- lished to commemorate the finished work of Christ in the new creation of the spiritual world. As in the former creation God had said, “Let there be light and there was light,” so the resurrection of the Lord was His omnipotent word, saying, Let there be light in the spiritual world, and there was light: “For God who commanded the light to 258 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE shine out of darkness hath shined into our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ... Who hath abolished death, and brought light and immortality to light.” As at the original creation, order and beauty arose out of the prime- val chaos, so at the resurrection of Christ the chaos which had previously reigned in the spiritual world began to give place to the order of moral law and to the beauty of holiness. As God rested from His work of creation when it was finished, so our Lord Jesus Christ, when He had finished His work from which the new creation was to spring, passed into the rest of His eternal glory and re- ward. And as God, when He looked upon all that He had made, pronounced it very good, so our blessed Lord, surveying the fruits and consequences of His work in the history of mankind, pronounces them all very good; and thus the prophecy is fulfilled: “He shall see of the travail of His soul and shall be satisfied”’ Indeed, it may be truly said that this new spiritual creation is a greater and nobler work of Divine power than was the creation of the natural world. There were, therefore, the best of reasons why the day on which it was crowned should be forever distinguished from all others as, in a peculiar sense, “the Lord’s Day,” and why it should be sanctified in place of that which had previously commemorated what now should hardly be remembered by reason of the glory which so much excelled it. If, now, the preceding argument be sound and conclu- sive, it follows by inevitable necessity that the instructions given in the Old Testament for the observance of the Sab- bath are, in their spiritual import, equally valid for the Sabbath of the new dispensation: and these have been so lucidly and admirably exhibited by the Westminster di- vines, that we can hardly do better than to present them here in their words, as follows: “The Sabbath or Lord’s Day is to be sanctified by a THE HOLY SABBATH 259 holy resting all that day, not only from such works as are at all times sinful, but even from such worldly employ- ments and recreations as are on other days lawful; and [by] making it our delight to spend the whole time (ex- cept so much of it as is to be taken up in works of neces- sity and mercy) in the public and private exercises of God’s worship: and to that end, we are to prepare our hearts, and with such foresight, diligence and moderation to dispose and seasonably dispatch our worldly business, that we may be the more free and fit for the duties of the day.... The sins forbidden in the fourth commandment are, all omission of the duties required, all careless, negli- gent and unprofitable performing of them, and being weary of them, all profaning the day by idleness, and doing that which is in itself sinful, and by needless works, words, and thoughts about our worldly employments and recreations.” To this is added, also, among other things: “The charge of keeping the Sabbath is more specially directed to gov- ernors of families and other superiors, because they are bound, not only to keep it themselves, but to see that it be observed by all those that are under their charge, and be- cause they are prone ofttimes to hinder them by employ- ments of their own.” Now, all these obligations are founded on clear state- ments in the word of God, some of which are exceedingly instructive as illustrating the nature and extent of that observance of the Sabbath which He requires. One of these is contained in the account which is given us of the manna in the wilderness. or since a universal and pressing temptation to violate this Divine law would ne- cessarily arise in connection with the provision and prepa- ration of man’s daily food, special pains had to be taken to guard this point. Accordingly, even before the law had been re-affirmed from Mount Sinai, an example of its violation occurred, which is carefully recorded, and which, no doubt, was permitted, for the instruction of all succeed- 260 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ing generations of mankind. Jor the manna, as we have | seen, did not fall on the seventh day, and the people were strictly probibited from going out to look for it on that day: a double portion fell on the sixth day, and they were commanded to gather twice as much on that day, and to prepare what was left over to serve them on the Sabbath. Thus it was said to them: “The Lord hath given you the Sabbath ; therefore, he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place—-let no man go out of his place on the Sabbath-day....To- morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord: bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe, and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.” And on the morrow it was said to them: “ Eat that to-day, for to-day is a Sab- bath unto the Lord ; to-day ye shall not find it in the field. _,..And it came to pass that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.” Also, if they gathered more than was necessary on any other day, it corrupted and bred worms; but that which they prepared on the sixth day for the Sabbath did not corrupt, “neither was there any worm therein.” Now, if there be in all this any instruction for us, it cannot surely be less than that we are prohibited from all unnecessary provision and preparation of food on the Sabbath-day. Here it is enjoined that our food for that day is to be cooked on the day preceding. We are taught, moreover, that by such abstinence we shall lose nothing ; that God’s blessing on our industry will enable us by six days’ labor to provide for the seventh ; and that all unnecessary labor on that day will prove unprofitable. Indeed, if men would take pains to make suitable observations on this point, we have reason to believe that nothing could be found more uniform and remarkable than the utter unprofitableness of Sunday work. Sunilar instructions also are given us by the prophet THE HOLY SABBATH 261 Nehemiah after the return from the captivity in Baby- lon, where the people seem to have fallen into great laxity in the observance of the Sabbath. ‘Some of these are as follows: “In those days I saw in Judah some treading wine-presses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses, as, also, wine, grapes and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath-day : and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish and all manner of ware, and sold on the Sabbath unto the children of Judah in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath-day ? Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us and upon this city? Yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by pro- faning the Sabbath.” The interest of this passage, how- ever, lies not so much in its prohibition of secular employ- ments connected with ‘ the selling and buying of victuals,’ but more especially in the fact, that it brings distinctly into view the duties of governors and rulers, as such, to protect all men in the observance of the Sabbath by such exercise of their authority and such laws as shall in no wise favor, but discourage and suppress its open and pub- lie violation. For inasmuch as it involves one of the great moral principles of the decalogue, laws for the pro- tection and promotion of its observance, with penalties for its violation, rest on the same foundation, are of the same character, and are no less necessary to the well-being of man- kind, than legal prohibitions of theft, adultery and murder. To enact and execute such laws is a duty which nations and rulers owe to God on their own responsibility ; and it has no more connection with questions of union between church and state than any other enactments founded on Christian morality (in distinction from pagan and Mohammedan) which is the common law of all Christian countries. 262 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE Moreover, the Sabbath is not only to be observed by abstinence from all such unnecessary labors, but is to be kept holy with the mind and heart. This is necessarily implied in its New Testament name of “the Lord’s Day,” as also in the words, “ the holy Sabbath unto the Lord,” “the Sabbath of the Lord thy God;” and it is clearly brought out in many passages, such as the following: “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord honorable; and shalt honor Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” And the opposite violations of the Sabbath with the mind and heart are thus stigmatized: ‘“ Hear ye this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the poor of the land to fail, saying, When will the new moon be gone that we may sell corn, and the Sabbath, that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small and the shekel great, and falsying the balances of deceit?” Now here we are prohibited from doing our own works, from speaking our own words, from thinking our own thoughts, and from seeking in any way our own pleasure, that is, from all actions, thoughts and affections concerning our secular employments and recreations, and from that im- patience and weariness which are inseparable from the restraints of Sabbath-keeping where the heart is not in it; and all such things are properly associated where they be- long, with dishonesty and oppression of the poor, to which they often lead. These prohibitions enjoin, of course, the opposite duties, which also are mostly expressed, namely, that we think the thoughts of God, seek the pleasure of God, speak the words of God, and do the works of God ; that we count this holy day of the Lord honorable and a THE HOLY SABBATH 263 delight—that we take delight in its holy exercises and de- votions; and to such observance of it all temporal and fantoal blessings are promised on the faith of God: “ For the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” In conclusion, the motives which we have for the faith- ful observance of the Sabbath are, when rightly appre- ciated, of all-controlling efficacv. In general, they are all that have force and weight to incline our hearts to keep any other of God’s commandments. In particular, they are such as the following: 1. We have our Lord’s declaration that “the Sabbath was made for man,” the force of which is, that its proper observance is necessary to the well-being and happiness of mankind—that there is a blessing from God in it—and this is abundantly confirmed by all experience. For if such experience can make anything certain, it is that rest from labor and worldly cares one day in seven is indis- pensable to health of body and mind. Uninterrupted secular employments exhaust the life, induce softening of the brain, paralytic affections, epilepsies, consumptions, and many other acute and fatal maladies. The employment of the Sabbath in the worship and service of God, and in unselfish endeavors to do good to others, brings with it a change in the currents of thought and other mental exer- cises and in the bodily activities which is refreshing, re- invigorating and healthful—it inspires new life and energy after the secular toil of the week. ‘This change is most necessary for laboring people, who receive as much com- pensation for six days’ work as they would for seven, and who accomplish thereby as much, no doubt, for their em- ployers. The plea that such people need to spend the day in worldly recreation and pleasure-seeking, and are justified in so doing, has nothing in it but deceitful plausi- bility; for where it is thus perverted into a mere secular holiday, it soon becomes, through the exactions of employ~ ers and the pressure of want on the unemployed, a day of 264 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE labor like the others. Of all people, the poor have the ereatest need to stand by the religious observance of the Sabbath; for it is their strongest protection against that oppression of their taskmasters which is so closely con- nected, as we have seen, with the violation and relaxed ob- servance of God’s holy day. 2. The Sabbath is indispensable to the proper influence and success of the Christian religion in the world. For it affords the only suitable and practicable time and opportu- nity for the people to assemble themselves together for public worship, the preaching of the gospel, the ceiebra- tion of the sacraments, Christian communion, and Sabbath- school teaching : and without these,with the exception of the last, which is not therefore to be regarded as of small im- portance, there can be no Christianity. If they should fall into desuetude, not only could it make no progress, but it would soon die out of the world. Its power in dif- ferent countries may even now be measured by the manner in which the Sabbath is observed. For where it has ceased to be regarded as a holy day, and has become for the most part a secular holiday, there we find a very sparse attend- ance on church services in the morning, and the afternoon and evening are given up to pleasure seeking; in conse- quence of which, drunkenness, immorality and crime abound, and there is more of these than on any other day. It is well understood that to close up on the Sabbath the places where intoxicating liquors are sold would ruin most of them. On'the other hand, where the day is the most strictly and generally observed, there religion has the greatest power for the salvation of man—there we uni- formly find the least immorality, drunkenness, pauperism and crime. Wemake no show of evidence here because these things are undeniable: whence it is evident that the enemies of the Sabbath are the enemies of the Christian religion. 3. Sabbath-breaking brings upon men some of the THE HOLY SABBATH 265 heaviest judgments of God. There is hardly anything more insisted on in the Word than this; and it is equally true of individuals, communities and nations, Thus the captivity in Babylon is represented in many places as a judgment upon Israel for this sin, of which the following is a single example: “And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon, where they were servants...to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths ; for as long as she lay desolate she kept Sabbath to fufil three score and ten years.” Also, in many other places, the banishment of the Jews from Palestine, the desolation of their cities and country, and their dispersion throughout the world, as we see them now, are ascribed to their sin of Sabbath-breaking, of all which the following is a single example: “And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you, and your land shall be desolate and your cities waste. Then shall the land enjoy her Sabbaths as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies’ land : even then shall the land rest and enjoy her Sabbaths.” In fact, a great many of God’s judgments upon men are in His word connected directly or indirectly with the violation of the fourth commandment; and this, for the best of reasons, as we can see, namely, that this sin is often the beginning and root of many others; whilst strict morality in this particular is a mighty defence against temptation in all circumstances. 4, But the only effectual motive to Sabbath-keeping, we are persuaded, must be drawn from the reason which God himself has given us, in that “He rested and was re- freshed ” after His work of creation; in other words, that there is something in God which the Sabbath represents, and to which it corresponds. Where this motive is not enforced, we may expect “the holy of the Lord” to be, as now it is, imperfectly sanctified by the best, and generally violated without remorse or compunction. Its restoration 12 266 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE to its true place in the church, we have reason to anticipate, could hardly fail to be accompanied and followed by a mighty increase of her spiritual light, and of her spiritual power for the salvation of mankind. XIV THE INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone: I will make him a help meet for [counterpart to] him.... Male and feraale created He them, and blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl] of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. In these sublime deliverances, we have the origin and institution, the nature and objects, of human society, as it lay before the mind of God when He created man. The words, “It is not good that man should be alone,” express the most comprehensive of all his necessities, namely, that of association with his kind. To satisfy this want, a woman was created, and marriage instituted, for the pro- creation of human beings; and thus society was instituted. Also, in the words, literally translated, “I will make him a help counterpart to him,” we have given the most funda- mental principle of the marriage union, and of all human associations. For it is this counterpartness of man and woman to each other—physical, intellectual and moral— which renders marriage organic in its nature, and consti- tutes it the foundation and type of organic society. In fine, the object of this arrangement as here stated, is, that man, by his associated energies, should subdue and control the forces of nature and the properties of matter to his own uses and ends. Thus we have laid open before us the whole vast realm of social science, and the principles authoritatively prescribed by which only is. it possible to 267 268 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ~ comprehend in unity the infinite variety and complexity of the social phenomena. These principles we now undertake to elucidate. But, first, it may be premised, that there is not a little prejudice in the minds of sensible and well-informed peo- ple against sociology, that 1s, the science of human society. This is due, no doubt, to a variety of causes, one of which is, that this whole department of knowledge has com- monly been identified with political economy, which, in fact, includes only one or two of at least six co-ordinate branches of the general subject: and the influence of this cause has been all the greater inasmuch as the methods and conclusions of the different authors in economics have hitherto proved anything but harmonious or satisfactory. Besides this, the social forces and phenomena are so numer- ous, and so complicated with each other, that a complete analysis of them seems to be an almost hopeless task. But probably the most influential of these causes is, that the subject has had a peculiar attraction for, and has been most copiously treated by infidel authors, such as Hobbes, Comte, Buckle, J. Stewart Mill and Herbert Spencer. This, however, ought not to influence our minds when we consider what ample instruction God has given us on the subject of our social relations, which certainly implies that the science of them, notwithstanding their number and complexity, is a possible one. Moreover, this science treats, as we shall presently see, of a vast number of most interesting problems, the solution of which can hardly fail to affect the welfare of mankind as deeply and perma- nently as any that have been agitated since the rise of the Protestant reformation. But, apart from these considera- tions, there are two all-sufficient reasons for a critical ex- amination of the nature of human society. One of these is, that man is essentially rational, and hence under a necessity of striving to render to himself a rational account of the phenomena of his own life, in which the social INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 969 element everywhere predominates. Thus he is naturally led to undertake a description and classification of the social facts, in order to determine, in the interest of science, the laws by which they are governed. The other reason is, that such a rational comprehension of the social instincts tends to bring them under the control of reason and free- will, apart from which, they are like untrained and un- pruned vines, which run wild, waste their redundant energies, and frustrate their own ends. For whatsoever is distinctively human is such from its connection with reason and free-will; everything else in man is either animal or vegetable. The social instincts, which have just been mentioned, are the primary cause of all association among living creatures. In the animal or lower, as well as in all the higher and spiritual elements of his complex nature, man is a social being. As by nature birds fly in the air, and fish swim in the water, so man, by that which he has in common with the animals, lives in society. As mere animals, human beings would associate together for the same reasons that bees live in swarms, and beavers in tribes. The nobler elements of human nature are equally social. As rational beings, we have an inborn consciousness, an intuitive perception, of our vital dependence upon society. The moral and spiritual nature in man is pre-eminently social, and incapable of being otherwise comprehended, developed and perfected. For man is not man but in and through association with his kind. Human life is essen- tially a communion. The perfect idea of humanity can never be realized apart from that great principle which is enunciated in the words of the Apostles’ Creed: “T believe in the communion of saints.” Such is the profound significance of the declaration: “It is not good for man to be alone.” Accordingly, in all ages and countries, both in that undeveloped or degraded condition in which the animal predominates over the rational and moral nature, 270 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE and in the highest state of civilization and enlightenment, in which the spiritual gives the supreme law to human life, men have lived, and must ever live, in society. Solitude is naturally hateful, and an adequate punishment for the worst crimes. Hence the peculiar form in which the death, penalty was prescribed in the law of Moses: “That soul shall be cut off from his people. This all-pervading principle of association is limited, however, by the distinction between species in living creatures ; in other words, it is conditioned by specific unity of life. For animals of diverse species, except under artificial arrangements, do not flock or herd or swarm together. Even the most closely allied forms of animal life, such as the bison and the cow, the dog and the wolf, are naturally the bitterest enemies to each other. They seem to be incapable of understanding and of sympathiz- ing with each other, and, hence, of associating together. The case is similar with man, who can hardly form any conception of the consciousness or experience of a mere animal, or of an angel, or, indeed, of any creature belong- ing to a different species from his own. If there were not this unity of life in mankind, if we were not all properly of one species, there could be no mutual understanding or sympathy among us, and we could not associate with each other any more than the fox with the dog, or the bee with the beaver. Yet there is a fundamental difference between man and the lower creatures with respect to their associations. For that of animals, except in their distinctions of sex, is mostly destitute of that counterpartness upon which organization is founded, and which is the most essential characteristic of human society. Among animals of the same species, which only can associate together in a state of nature, there is lit- tle or no diversity of faculty and function, of special charac- teristics and adaptations, corresponding to each other in different individuals. The members of a grex, whether a INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY OT tribe, or flock, or swarm, are all substantially alike, and little more than mere repetitions of each other. This uni- formity is so striking that it is marked in the most widely separated languages of mankind by the use of the singular for the plural, as where we say, a flock of sheep, not sheeps, a herd of deer, a tribe of beaver, a school of fish, not deers, nor beavers, nor fishes. It is true, however, that we find in some species of in- sects what seems to be a pre-intimation of this diversity of faculty and function, and a semblance of organization founded upon it. In a bee-hive, e. g., there are several distinct classes of individuals included within the common species, each of which is charged with a different set of operations. Here we have the mother or queen bee, the males or drones, the nurses, the workers in wax, and the workers in honey. But, even in this case, the individuals of each class are mere numerical repetitions of each other, and are confined to the same operations by a distinct and peculiar physical constitution. We discover nothing here of the nature of voluntary division or organization of labor. One bee does not gather wax and pass it to another to be built into a cell, neither does one gather honey and pass it to another to be stored. ven here, therefore, the grex offers us nothing beyond that semblance of organization in which, as in so many other instances, the operations of ani- mal instinct counterfeit those of human reason. Among animals, in general, there is not even this semblance. Those of the same species are all confined to means and operations which are precisely or nearly the same. Birds of the same species all build their nests in the same man- ner, and there is no part in the work of a beaver-dam, so far as we know, which one beaver cannot perform as well as another. Mere animals are incapable of specializing their employments, incapable of voluntary division and: organization of their labors, and hence their association with each other is properly inorganic. ZT WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE But, whilst the grex is thus incapable of organized asso- ciation, the individuals of which it is composed are abun- dantly capable of co-operating together for common ends, and thus of increasing their force by massing their num- bers. And, in this way, the principle of animal association enters also into human society, most largely, as we should anticipate, where man is least developed, or most degraded, and his condition approaches most nearly to that of the brute. for it is in such communities that we find the fewest and least marked divergencies from. the common type, the least diversity of special characteristics and adap- tations, and hardly any specialization or diversification of employments. Each wild man builds his own hut, or finds for himself’ a natural cave to shelter him from the elements, makes his own weapons, does his own hunting and fishing, and gathers for himself the spontaneous fruits of nature. Here, also, marriage and the family, the foundation and chief corner-stone of organized society, are almost or quite unknown. Consequently, whilst all are thus engaged in the same pursuits and operations, their human capacity for personal differentiation remains undeveloped. They are almost as much alike as the wild horses of the South Amer- ican savannahs. We find it so to this day in Africa, Aus- tralia, among the ante-Brahmanical tribes of India, and elsewhere. The striking resemblance of the American In- dians to each other in color, stature, features, mental and moral characteristics, and in other numerous particulars, has been often remarked, and various explanations of it have been suggested ; but the true reason, beyond a ques- tion, is, that their wild life affords them the least possible diversification of employments. Hence they have few other ways of increasing their force than that of massing their numbers. In these low forms, human life, in its associa- tion as in other respects, approaches that of mere animals. This principle of animal gregariousness, in default of a better word, enters, also, as a substratum, into the higher INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 273 and more developed forms of human society. We see it in a gang of field-hands picking cotton, in a gang of “log- gers” felling timber, in a gang of laborers digging a canal, and wherever the word gang is applied to a company of human beings. These, indeed, are not perfect examples, for some degree of specialization enters into almost all human employments. ,And this simple co-operation of numbers, with little diversity in the means used, is of such impor- tance to the great objects of human society that, without it, little could ever have been accomplished. For the units of personal force are so small and feeble that, apart from mutual aid, they could hardly fail to be swallowed up, in no long time, by the hostile forces of nature—those vast and fatal forces, which threaten us from every quarter, and which destroy without mercy all the feebler forms of human, animal and vegetable life; but which man, by his associated and organized energies, subjugates to his own uses and ends, until, with all the docility of domesticated animals, they grind in his mills, carry his messages with lightning speed, and transport him and his merchandise, as the bird flies, from continent to continent and from pole to pole. These grand results are mainly due to organization founded on counterpart differences between individuals, which is the leading characteristic of human society, as distinguished from animal gregariousness, and the most fundamental principle of social science. It is our lamp and clue in the exploration of the labyrinths of this vast department of knowledge. By it alone are we enabled to comprehend the phenomena with which we have to deal. It is to the infinite number and complexity of the social phenomena what the principle of gravitation is to the phys- ical universe. Without it, society is a chaos; with it, a cosmos. Hence we can make no further progress in this discussion until we have formed a distinct and precise con- ception of this all-comprehending principle. Lat 274 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE Let us observe, then, that an organism in nature is a body possessed of life and various organs, which organs minister to the support, development and manifestation of its life. or this purpose they are in vital union with the body, and, also, with each other, in consequence of which they are mutually interdependent, and contribute to each other’s support and well-being by a system of vital ex- changes among themselves. ‘Thus the human body is an organism. It is possessed of life, and is composed of organs, such as the hands, feet, stomach, heart, lungs, brain, eyes, nose and mouth. These organs are in vital union with the body, and thereby, with each other. Also, they are different from each other, and perform different functions in their ministry to the body and to each other; and they are mutually interdependent by a system of vital exchanges among themselves. The hands, e. g., provide food for the mouth, the mouth prepares it and delivers it over to the stomach, and the stomach distributes it as nourishment back again to the hands, mouth, and all the other organs and parts of the body. Such is an organism in nature—the grand type of organic society. It is no less necessary for us to form a distinct and clear conception of the principal differences between the higher and lower organisms in nature, for the reason that these represent the more and less advanced stages of organization in society. The higher, then, an organism is, the more numerous and perfect are its organs, the more diverse they are from each othér, the more specialized are their functions, the more interdependent they are, and the more full and complete is the system of exchanges among them. The highest organism in nature is that of the human body, and we see how numerous and perfect are its organs; how different they are from each other—as the eye from the hand, the stomach from the brain; how diverse and specialized are their functions, so that by no means can the heart perform the work of the lungs, nor the feet that INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 975 of the brain; how dependent they are upon each other, so that a lesion of one will often paralyze them all; and how full and perfect is the system of vital exchanges among them, in that the brain directs the hands, the hands pro- vide food for the stomach, and the stomach nourishes the brain. On the other hand, the lower an organism is, the fewer and less perfect are its organs, the more they resemble each other, the less special are their functions, the more independent they are of each other, and the feebler are the exchanges among them. The angle-worm is an example, and how few are its organs—there are but three or four of them—and these are so much alike, perform so nearly the same functions, and are so independent of each other, that, if it be cut in two, each part, it is said, will continue to live, and will become a perfect worm. But, whether this be true of the earth-worm or not, it is cer- tainly true of the polype, a still lower organism. There are, of course, many other differences between the higher and the lower forms of organization, but these are the principal ones, and are sufficient for our present purpose. In further illustration of these organic differences, we quote from the Morphologie of Goethe as follows: “The more imperfect a creature is, the more do its parts resemble each other, and the whole to which they belong. The more perfect a creature is, the more dissimilar are its parts. In the former case, the parts are more or less a repetition of the whole; in the latter, they are unlike the whole. The greater the resemblance between the parts, the less subordination there is of one to another. Sub- ordination indicates a high grade of organization.” * Professor Arnold Guyot, also, in his Earth and Man, applies these laws of organization to illustrate the nature of human society as follows : “ Differences are the condition of development. The * Goethe’s Summtliche Werke, Sechsanddreissigster Band, p. 7. 276 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE mutual exchanges which are the consequences of these differences waken and manifest life. The greater the di- versity of organs, the more active and superior is the life of the individual; and the greater the variety of indi- vidualities and of relations in a society, the greater also is the sum of lite, the more complete, and of the more eleva- ted order.” * Now, in all these particulars and in many others which might be enumerated, organisms in nature symbolize and represent human society, especially its higher and lower forms, its more and less advanced stages of organization. And this analogy is so complete and obvious that it has always been recognized, and has become so familiar that “the social organism” seems hardly to involve a figure of speech. Thus Plato, in his model Republic, divides the citizens into three classes corresponding to the three prin- cipal faculties of the human mind. The first of these is that of the rulers which represent the intellect or reason of society ; the second is the military class, typified by the human will; the third includes all who are engaged in the pursuits of industry, and who, in his scheme, correspond to the passions and appetites of the animal nature in man. Here, however, the analogy is very imperfectly compre- hended, and is perverted to inculcate gross heathen errors, especially that of the essential degradation of the indus- trial class. Aristotle also teaches us that :— “A state [or body politic] is composed of dissimilar parts, as an animal is of life and body... of these and many other dissimilar parts.” But, unlike Plato, he makes little or no use of the anal- ogy, although he indorses and emphasizes the errors which had been drawn from it by his great predecessor. For in an- other place he makes the following authoritative deliverance : “Tt is impossible for a mechanic, or hired seryant, to * Earth and Man, pp. 100, 101. INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY pir: practice a life of virtue... It is not proper for any man of honor, nor for any citizen, nor for any one engaged in public affairs, to learn these servile employments.” In modern times, also, this analogy has been recognized and its significance expounded, as in the celebrated work of Hobbes on Civil and Seclesiastical Society entitled Leviathan, which name he applies to society itself, as follows : “That great Leviathan called a commonwealth or state (civitas)...is but an artificial man, though of greater strength and stature than the natural...in which the sovereignty is an artificial soul... reward and punishment, the nerves; wealth and riches... its strength; salus popult ... its business... concord, health; sedition, sickness; civil war, death.” It is true that in all this, as in everything else by the same author, there is a great deal that is very “ artificial,” but the conception of society as an organism, which runs through the whole work, is none the less true and profound. Again, in the Sociology of Comte, this conception is de- veloped and applied in great fulness of detail, and it is the fundamental idea of the Principles of Social Science, by Henry C. Carey, and of all his voluminous writings on this subject. In fine, Herbert Spencer lays down the three following points of resemblance between organisms in nature and human societies, although he fails to make any adequate use of them for the solution of social problems : “The first is, that, commencing as small aggregations, they—that is, both organisms in nature and societies—in- sensibly augment in mass, some of them reaching eventually perhaps a hundred thousand times what they originally were. ‘he second is, that, while at first so simple in structure as to be almost considered structureless, they assume, in the course of their growth, a continually in- creasing complexity of structure. The third is, that, though in their early undeveloped state there exists in them 978 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE searcely any mutual dependence of parts, these parts gradually acquire a mutual dependence, which becomes at last so great that the activity and life of each part is made possible only by the activity and life of the rest. These parallelisms will appear the more significant, the more we contemplate them... The orderly progress from simplicity to complexity displayed by societies in common with every living body whatever .. distinguishes them from inanimate bodies..and this functional dependence of the parts .. is exhibited by the noblest animals and the highest so- cieties in the greatest degree... The lowest types of ani- mals do not increase to anything like the size of the higher ones; and similarly we see that aboriginal societies are comparatively of limited growth. In complexity, also, our civilized nations as much exceed the primitive savage ones as a vertebrate animal does a zodphite. In simple communities, moreover, as in simple creatures, the mutual dependence of the parts is so slight that subdivision or mutilation causes little inconvenience, whilst in complex communities, as in complex creatures, you cannot remove or injure any considerable organ without producing great disturbance or death to the rest.” We conclude these citations with one from St. Paul, in which he sets forth the Divine idea of society, as destined to be first realized in the Christian church, and ultimately in all mankind, and which contains, beyond comparison, the most full and significant exhibition of the organic structure of society that has ever been given in such few words. It all turns upon the analogy between the human organism and man’s association with his kind, to which he elsewhere refers in many different connections; but here he devotes a long chapter to a detailed exposition of it, emphasizing the diversity of organs, functions, ministries and operations within the organic unity of the social body, in order to show that the individuals of which it is com- posed bear to it and to each other relations similar to those ae — INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 979 between the human body and its members, and between the members themselves. The passage is in part as fol- lows :— “As the body is one and hath many members, and as all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ [Christian society]. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because IT am not the hand, I am not of the body, is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body, is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? .. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But, now, they are many members, yet one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee; nor, again, the hand to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary; and those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor, and our un- comely parts have more abundant comeliness; for our comely parts have no need. But God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honor to that part which lacked, that there should be no schism in the _ body, but that the members should all have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.” If, now, we compare this splendid exhibition of the organic structure of society, and of the relations and duties of the different members of the organism, especially in re- spect to the honor here bestowed upon “the more feeble,” with the imperfect grasp of the idea by Plato and Aristo- tle, as in their condemnation of the laboring classes to hope- less degradation, we shall obtain a glimpse of the immeas- 280 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE urable intellectual as well as moral superiority of Chris- tianity to heathenism, even when this latter is thus repre- sented by the greatest minds it ever produced. Here we see what a world-wide difference there is between the views which are given us in the Holy Scriptures with respect to those members of society “which we think to be less honor- able,” and those which were inculeated by heathen philoso- phy: and, assuredly, there would be fewer infidels among the laboring masses, if they only knew how much they are indebted to the Christian religion. Here, then, we may take occasion to lay down a funda- mental principle of method in social science, as we may hope that one day it will come to be exhibited. This con- sists in the application of the moral laws of Christianity to the solution of all the social, but, especially, of the indus- trial problems. For however sceptical men may be with respect to the supernatural origin of our holy religion, they hardly ever fail to recognize the excellence of its moral laws; and the scientific value of these laws, as distinguished from their religious obligation, is illustrated in this science in an entirely new and striking manner. Hence we may confidently anticipate that this line of investigation will develop in time the crowning argument in the evidences of Christianity. For in an experience of many years’ teaching, we have found it the most effectual antidote to that distressing scepticism which is now so rife, even in the minds of ingenuous and thoughtful young men. But however this may be, in the application of these laws to the solution of the industrial and all the other social prob- lems—problems which agitate and divide the most ad- vanced thinkers of our time—we can feel that we touch bottom ; that we have struck the solid rock; and, building on this foundation, we can foresee that we shall be able in time to establish a science of society which time itself will never be able to overthrow. We proceed now to exhibit the organic structure of so- INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 281 ciety by means of the relations which its organs bear to their organism and to each other. Of these organs there are two classes, which we may characterize as vital and teleological. ‘The vital organs, in a sense analogous only to that which these words have in physiology, are the in- dividuals or living persons of which society is composed. The teleological organs are the institutions which embody and represent the general aims, objects, ends, for which society exists. Tirst, then, we consider the organic structure of society as depending upon its vital organs. And here we are im- mediately struck with the wonderful fact, that, among the innumerable individuals of the human race, no two can be found who are in all respects like each other. All human beings are either different from each other by na- ture, or they have by nature a capacity for facile differen- tiation. Each person has some peculiar characteristic, or quality, or capacity, or faculty, or combination of faculties, or degree of their development, in virtue of which he is adapted to do something which cannot be so well done, or to fill some place which cannot be so well filled, by any other person. One is endowed with great physical strength, another with superior intellectual ability ; one has a natural or acquired adaptation for recluse study, another for busi- ness and affairs; oné is born a poet, another becomes an orator. In so far as society depends upon the rational and moral nature in man, rather than upon animal instinct; in the degree in which it shapes itself and directs its energies to rational and moral aims, that is to say, just so far as it becomes distinctively human, do these individual differ- ences develop and manifest themselves, For the differences which exist by nature lead to diver- sity of occupations. It is natural for men and women to employ themselves differently. Men who are possessed of great’ physical endowments naturally apply themselves to those pursuits in which success depends upon such qualifi- 282 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE cations. Those of superior intellectual powers, but, per- haps, of feeble health and strength, are naturally guided in their selection of employments by these special adapta- tions. The natural tendency in these matters is for every one to addict himself to that mode of life in which he feels himself most capable of achieving success. Differences of taste, also, and of outward circumstances, have much to do with this diversity of occupation. From some of these causes it was, no doubt, that “ Abel became a keeper of sheep, and Cain a tiller of the ground;” that “Jabal was the father of such as dwell in tents and have cattle ;” that “ Jubal was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ ...and Tubal-Cain was an instructor of every artif- icer in brass and iron.” Again, this diversification of employments reacts upon the natural differences from which it springs, and gives them a more copious development. For as each person occupies himself with some specialty, he becomes more specialized. In this way, the sailor and the farmer are dif- ferenced from each other by their peculiar modes of life in their physical forms, in the muscles which are most fully de- veloped, in their gait, features, language, mental faculties and habits, and even in their moral characters, to such a de- gree that it is almost impossible to mistake one for the other. A similar differentiation takes place from the almost infinite diversification of employments throughout the whole circle of every highly organized community, which is composed of farmers, millers, bakers, graziers, butchers, cooks, carpenters, masons, blacksmiths, white-smiths, spinners, weavers, tailors, shoemakers, hatters, merchants, bankers, shippers, sailors, engineers, brakemen, stokers, telegraph operators, lawyers, doctors, teachers, artists and clergymen— of these and numberless others engaged in special employ- mentsand pursuits in their endless subdivisions and branches. There is not one of these which does not exert a great influ- ence to differentiate the members of society from each other. INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 983 Moreover, these personal differences, both natural and acquired, and these different employments, are, in a won- derful manner, the counterparts and complements of each other, as, in the human organism, are the stomach, mouth, heart, lungs and senses. These counterpart and comple- mentary relations are the most pronounced and conspicuous between the two sexes; but they are similar, only in a lower degree, between the farmer and the miller, the miller and the baker, the baker and his customers ; between the iron- miner, the iron-manutacturer, the hardware-merchant and his customers ; between the merchant, the shipper and the railroad men, and so on throughout the whole vast circle of organized society. Thus, both the individuals and their employments are mutually adapted to, and fit into each other, like the carpenter’s tenons and mortices, the fans of dovetailing, the balls and sockets of the animal joints, and the sutures of the human skull. Hence we have one of the main sources of that intense attraction which binds society together, and which steadily increases as organiza- tion advances. Tor it is in virtue of these counterpart differences that the individual members of the social body are mutually interdependent, for supplying each other’s wants, by that all-comprehending system of exchanges which is inseparable from organization. Societary attraction from this source has often been il- lustrated by that association which naturally takes place between two beggars, one of whom is blind and the other lame, in which the blind man carries the lame on his shoulders, and the lame guides the steps of the blind, so that the eyes of one and the legs of the other serve for both. Also, it has been illustrated by a beautiful ana- logue in chemistry, as if even here nature were striving up- wards towards organization. For it is found that no two ultimate particles of matter which are precisely alike, that is, no two atoms of oxygen or of hydrogen, manifest any attraction for each other, but are mutually repellant. As 284 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE soon, however, as we bring together unlike particles, atoms of oxygen and of hydrogen, under the proper conditions, they immediately rush into each other’s embrace and form a chemical combination. Moreover, as even unlike par- ticles will not combine in other than definite proportions, so many and no more of oxygen with so many and no more of hydrogen, so must there be a definite proportion or correspondence between these differences both in human beings and in their employments, in order that their mutual attraction should be developed, and the organiza- tion of society attain to its utmost fulness and complete- ness. So many tailors and no more can combine with so many shoemakers in any particular community. Where either of these trades is in excess, a portion of its members will be out of work, and ready to leave their place in ~ search of employment elsewhere: and so it is in all the other specialties. But the more perfectly these differences correspond to each other in numbers and adaptations, the more completely does each individual find the supply of his deficiencies in the endowments and productions of the others, the stronger becomes the societary attraction, the more firmly is society dovetailed or sutured together, the higher its organization rises, and the nobler is the life which it develops and manifests. But the most beautiful example of all this we have in the marriage union, which is itself the most perfect of all the social organisms, as it is that from which society origi- nates and derives its organic nature. For marriage is wholly founded upon these counterpart and complementary differences in their most pronounced forms. ‘The two sexes differ from each other in a greater number of particulars, and these differences are more perfectly the counterparts and complements of each other, than in the case of any two individuals of the same sex. With respect to their physical forms and functions this is sufficiently obvious ; we need only to observe that here, as elsewhere, the outward INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 985 and material is the type of the inward and spiritual. For in man, the intellect predominates, in woman, the affec- tions ; and of the intellect itself, the reasoning or logical faculties are the more active and influential in man, the intuitive in woman. In man, strength and courage are distinguishing traits, in woman, patience and fortitude. Prudence is the stronger in man, whose governing motives arise from consideration of the fruit of actions, and from forecast of ends or objects to be attained ; faith and spirit- ual instincts and susceptibilities are the stronger in woman, whose most influential motives arise from the inward promptings of her heart. Now, it is from these counterpart and complementary differences that the two sexes, in the marriage union, are mutually dependent, that which is lacking in each being supplied from the fulness and overflow of the other. Hence arises that beautiful system of vital exchanges, that veritable communion of life, from which all subse- quent life originates, and in which, on both sides, “ it is more blessed to give than to receive.” For the woman is supported and defended by the superior strength and courage of her husband; the man is sustained and com- forted by the sympathy, patience and fortitude of his wife. He imparts to her of his prudence and forethought ; she to him of her faith and spiritual msight. Her reasoning faculties are strengthened and become clearer and steadier by communion with his understanding ; his intellect is in- formed and quickened by communion with her more direct and living intuitions, and his heart is warmed by the flame _ of her affections. These vital exchanges, moreover, are accompanied by others arising from the different employ- ments which are appropriate to men and women. And here, if we had space to develop it, we should find the ultimate solution of the whole woman question. or such, in general, are the differences established by God in the natures of man and woman, notwithstanding that, in defiance 286 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE of nature, some men may be womanish, and some women manish. ‘Thus we see that the two sexes were created to live in organic relations to each other, as members of one organism, that is to say, in marriage, and that only in this relation can the highest development and well-being of either be attained. In fine, the mutual attraction between the sexes is due to these counterpart differences, apart from which and from the mutual dependence and exchanges to which they give rise, there were no place for love or marriage. In consequence of these, the sexual attraction is the strongest of all, and the marriage union is the closest, the most in- timate, the most perfectly organic, of all human associa- tions. Here it is that the organic structure of society comes forth, and discloses its true nature, in its most typi- cal form. for it is not, as is often supposed, those things in which men and women are most alike, but those in which they are the most different, which draw them to- gether. The proverb that “ like seeks its like” refers to more general resemblances than those now under consider- ation, such as those between creatures of the same species, apart from which, as we have seen, natural association cannot take place. But within the specific unity, it is contrast, rather than similarity, which is the great source of attraction between the sexes. Accordingly, it has been often observed, that marriages take place more frequently, are more fruitful and happy, and their offspring are more healthy in body and mind, between those who present strong contrasts, physical, intellectual and moral, than be- tween those who most resemble each other. For where the husband and wife are very much alike in their endow- ments, temperaments, tastes and habits, as in the case of near relatives, the marriage is seldom a happy one, and the proportion of feeble, defective, deformed and idiotic children is greater than in other marriages. “ Breed- ing in and in,” as is well known, causes animals to INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY I87 degenerate. “Crossing the breed” expresses a physio- logical law which is of no less importance for the im- provement of mankind than of mere animals. This, surely, is a sufficient reason, though it is not the only one, for that prohibition of marriage between near relatives which we find in the laws of Moses, and in the codes of all civilized nations. Indeed, social arrangements to guard against such marriages extend almost as far back in time as we can trace the history of the human race. Thus, we see, it is in and through these counterpart dif- ferences in persons and in their ayocations that the organ- ization of society develops and perfects itself. Wherever they are comparatively few and indistinct, there we always find societary attraction feeble, and a low grade of social organization; there the people are undeveloped or de- graded, and often migratory in their character and habits, ready, on every slight occasion, to abandon country and kindred, and to form new associations. Hence the migra- tory tendencies of the Tartar and other nomadic tribes in all ages and countries. Hence those immense migrations of barbarians in the middle ages and in all preceding times. The great exodus of the Irish and Germanic peoples, in our day, is due to the loosening of the bonds of societary attraction from similar though not identical causes. In Germany, militarism, having come to predominate over all other social forces, acts as an electric battery to disintegrate society, and to expel the people from their homes and country. In Ireland, poverty has had much to do in pro- ducing a similar result, but this is not an adequate ex- planation. For there is nearly or quite as much pauperism in England, but the people do not emigrate in anything like an equal proportion. The more full explanation seems to be, that the diversified industries of Ireland have been destroyed by the overshadowing competition of English manufactures brought to bear upon them through the existing political union between the two countries. 288 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE From this cause, the Irish have long been mostly confined to one form of industry, that of agriculture, in conse- quence of which, their individual differences have merged in one common type of degradation; for the emigrants are so much alike that no one can fail to recognize them wherever they are seen. Hence the decay of the organic structure of society, the loosening of the bonds of society, and the scattering of the Irish people over the world. The organization of society perfects and crowns itself by that vast system of mutual exchanges between its interde- pendent organs which flows from their counterpart differences. We have a perfect type of these exchanges, as we have seen, in the human organism, wherein the hands provide for the mouth, the mouth prepares and passes the food to the stomach, and the stomach distributes it in the form of nourishment to all the other organs and parts of the body ; wherein, also, the eyes direct the feet, the feet bear the eyes from place to place, the brain supplies intelligence to the body, and the body blood to the brain. The great organic law of the whole is mutual interdependence, the supply of the wants of each organ by exchanges with all the others. Such, also, is the law of human society in the degree in which it attains to fulness and completeness of organiza- tion. For the personal quality, or capacity, or develop- ment which is deficient in one individual is more than adequate in another, and the wants of those who are en- gaged in the production of any one commodity are sup- plied by those who produce other commodities. Thus every one is dependent for the supply of his deficiencies upon the others, and each contributes something to com- plete the circle of endowments and productions in the social organism. For as each member of the human, so each member of the social body is indispensable to the full and perfect life of the whole. This is limited only by the case of a diseased organ, that is, a bad member of society, who, for the welfare of the body, must, in extreme INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY — 989 cases, “ be cut off from his people.” But the analogy holds good here, as elsewhere, for the health and even the life of the human organism sometimes requires that a diseased member should be amputated, a diseased organ extirpated. Hence that deep and tender interest, as rep- resented by St. Paul, which each member of society is bound to feel in the safety and welfare of all the others ; for “if one member suffer all the members suffer with it.’ Here, also, we have the foundation of the great moral law: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Hence, in fine, we might anticipate what we always find, that only in the more highly organized communities is the life of the individual adequately protected: in low and feeble organizations, it goes for almost nothing. Recklessness of life, the bowie knife or the revolver always at hand, is an infallible sign of a low and feeble social organization, of an undeveloped or degraded humanity. The exchanges which take place in the most highly or- ganized societies are of various kinds, such as that of ideas, that of sympathy and affection, and that of services and commodities. In fact, the social life, in its whole devel- opment, is no less dependent upon the freedom, prompt- ness and regularity of these exchanges than is the life of the human organism upon the circulation of the blood; and they are always the most free and prompt and regular where the differences in persons, employments and productions are most numerous, marked and most perfectly the counter- parts and complements of each other. Each of these forms of exchange has its own place for detailed exposition in that vast scheme of social science which the analysis of the teleological organs of society will immediately give us; but here we can only touch, by way of example, upon the exchange of ideas, upon which depend, in a degree which cannot be overestimated, the increase and diffusion of knowledge, the development of the human faculties, and the progress of civilization. For it is the chief function 13 290 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE of oral speech, of writing and printing, and of language itself, as inclusive of all possible modes of symbolizing, representing and expressing thought. Intellectual life, no less than every other form of life in man, is essentially acommunion. Thought is begotten of thought by mutual intercourse of mind with mind, nor does it pass beyond the embryo-state, until it is brought forth in words or sym- bols, so as to communicate itself to other minds. No man perfectly understands himself until he is able to make himself understood by others, nor fully believes in his own ideas until he is able to express them so as to convince others of their truth. or, in the words of Novalis: “It is certain, however it may be explained, that when I have won another to believe as I do, I believe more strongly than I did before.” And by this form of exchange, the knowledge of each becomes available by all, and that of all by each, with comparatively little expense of time or labor. What I know I can communicate to another in a thousandth part of the time it has taken me to learn it, and that other, of course, can do the same for me. A bare hint is often enough to possess another mind with the fruitful germs of thought which it has taken the life- time of the author to originate and develop. Thus all parties to such exchanges profit by what they receive, and still more by what they give; for here, as everywhere else, “it is more blessed to give than to receive.” ‘Thus all are enriched in a twofold manner, and enter upon a new course of acquisition with all the advantages of an intellectual capital derived from their social intercourse, to bring back again, from time to time, into the social circle their ever- increasing treasures. It is in this way that the faculties of the members of a highly-organized community receive their richest nourish- ment and most varied culture, attain to their fullest growth, put forth their most beautiful bloom, and bear their noblest fruit. For the sum of knowledge in every INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 991 such society constitutes a common pabulum upon which the minds of individuals nourish themselves, or, to change the figure, their vital atmosphere by which they are in- vigorated, and their vision is extended and purified. From the almost infinite diversification of special studies and employments it results, that the knowledge of each indi- vidual upon any particular subject, such as health, agricul- ture, or maritime affairs, is immeasurably greater than it is where no one has ever made a specialty of medicine, farm- ing, or navigation, And this difference, which is just that between civilization and barbarism, applies not only to individuals but also to nations which stand in organic relations to other nations, as compared with those which keep themselves insulated from the rest of mankind. For in the degree in which communion between the dif- ferent nations becomes full and free, does the human race become one society, one organism, each member of which reaps the harvest of the studies, labors and progress of all the others. These relations, moreover, are not limited to any present time, but each succeeding generation inherits the accumulations of intellectual, moral and material capi- tal which have been stored up in all the past: and, hence, progress in all the elements of wealth, that is, of well- being, must be recognized as a fundamental law of man’s history upon the earth, than which no physical law is more amply verified and demonstrated by the number of facts which it co-ordinates and explains. Thus far we have been chiefly occupied with the organic relations of the individual members or organs of society to each other, although this conception of the social organ- ism is no less fruitful with respect to those between society itself and its organs. Here, however, we must content ourselves with two or three of the plainest inferences. The first is, that the individual does not exist for him- self, but for society, the organ for its organism. Con- sequently, every person is bound to have some higher ob- 292 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ject of life than a merely selfish one, and this object must be the welfare of the community of which he is a member. This is the principle which justifies men in sacrificing their lives for their country ; and the fact, that there have been so many and such heroic sacrifices for this object is abun- dant evidence that the principle lies deep in human nature, and often influences the actions of men, even where it has never been formally recognized by the intellect. Its prac- tical application in matters of industry would lead to this result, that every person, whatever his ayvocation, would aim to produce something which would promote the gen- eral welfare and prosperity, and would account nothing else honorable or lawful, however much it might seem to be for his own selfish interest. For an organ which should — aim to advance its own interest to the damage of its own organism would deserve and require to be exterminated. This grand result, however, belongs largely to the future of society, although the idea itself is a prophecy that one day it will be realized. Our second inference is, that the organism of society is clothed with the power of government over its own organs. How far it may be wise to exercise this power is a large question which here we cannot undertake to discuss. Doubtless the individual should have all the liberty which is consistent with the welfare of society. But what these limits to the exercise of governmental powers are, it is for society, not for the: individual, to determine. Also, these powers of government must be conceived of as extending to industrial matters, as well as to all others which are of general interest and concern. For what must we think of a man who should abnegate all control over his own organs, as to how they should be employed? Society, therefore, has a rightful authority to influence, by wise legislation and other means, the flow of industry; to “ protect” and cherish any particular branch of production, such as that of food, clothing, leather, iron, ships, books, INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 993 for which the country may afford peculiar resources and facilities, and which would be everyway beneficial ; as, also, to prohibit and suppress other occupations which, though they may seem to promote the interests of individuals, are generally demoralizing and detrimental to society, such as gambling, lotteries, the traffic in intoxicants, and prostitu- tion. That theory of civil government which requires that all industrial matters should be left to take care of themselves is irreconcilable with the conception of society as an organism, and it is one which is advocated chiefly by those who seek their own selfish interests at the expense of others, and by the strong in order that they may be left free to break down and destroy the weak. Our third inference is, that society is bound to educate, defend and provide employment, where it may be neces- sary, for its members. For what must we think of a man who should neglect to educate and train his own organs to any useful work, or who should fail to see that they have work to do, or to defend them in their proper functions when assaulted by hostile forces, or who should renounce the care of them in disease and infirmity? We must think the same of every community which renounces or neglects these high functions and sacred duties to its members, for which society was instituted of God, and exists among men. For the right of the poor to labor is simply their right to live. And this idea strikes deeply into our present system of governmental education, which turns out our youth, at a time when they are exposed to their greatest temptations, utterly unskilled to do anything with their hands, with which the great body of them must earn their living, or starve, or steal, instead of teaching them some art or trade to enable them to support themselves by their honest labor. We come now, in conclusion, to the analysis of the teleo- logical organs of society, which are, as we have stated, the institutions that embody and represent the special aims or 294 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE ends of social life, and the means by which these aims are realized. We observe, then, that the most general or comprehen- sive object for which society was instituted among men, is the welfare or well-being of mankind. For it originated, as we have seen, in the creation of woman, concerning which God said: “It is not good for man to be alone.” It is true, this was spoken with primary reference to mar- riage, but yet to this form of association considered, not only in itself, but also as the fountain-head of those streams of life and population which contain the elements of all society. Now the well-being of man consists in the satis- faction of all his natural wants, and in the gratification of all his lawful and ordinate desires. These wants and de- sires, under a rigorous analysis, resolve themselves into six classes, comprehending six special aims of society, corre- sponding to which we have six classes of institutions for the attainment of these aims and the satisfaction of these wants. The first want is that of society itself, or social intercourse, which seeks its gratification through the insti- tution of marriage and the offspring thence derived : the second is the want of education, which is supplied through the family and all other educational institutions ; the third includes all the material wants, for the supply of which are all the institutions of industry ; the fourth is the want of justice and order in society, to satisfy which is the great end or object of the institutions of civil government; the fifth comprises all those wants which spring from the love of the beautiful, and these seek their gratification through the institutions and appliances of art; the sixth is that of the religious wants, which are supplied through the insti- tutions of religion. These six classes of institutions, for the reason that they represent the special objects for which society exists, are here characterized as its teleological organs. 1, The first of these is that of marriage, of which the INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 995 great end or aim is the pro-creation of human beings for the satisfaction of the want of society itself, and which, as it was the first in time, so also is it the first in importance, of all the social institutions. It was for this object prima- rily that God created man male and female, and blessed them, saying: “ Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” Hence the paramount importance of the insti- tution, which is illustrated, also, by the subjects which are included under it, which are such as the following: The fundamental laws of marriage, as laid down in the word of God, and in the nature of man; its influence upon hu- man well-being and happiness, according as these laws are observed, and the evils which flow from their violation by promiscuous intercourse, adultery, polygamy, intermarriage of near relatives, and unlawful divorce; population—the causes, laws and consequences to human welfare of its in- crease and decline; the organic nature of marriage, and the mutual exchanges to which it gives rise within itself, and in its relations to the other teleological organs. In the discussion of these subjects, we find that the true doc- trine of marriage is the chief corner-stone of the whole edifice of social science. 2. The second of these teleological organs includes all the educational institutions of society, at the head of which stands the family. For the family cannot be comprehended in its true nature and objects otherwise than as an educa- tional institution. This above all others is the object for which “ God setteth the solitary in families.” But educa- tion here must be taken in its most comprehensive sense, as that the object of which is to satisfy the human want of development—the development of all the physical and mental faculties, not only in children and youth, but also in men and women throughout the whole of life, and not only in individuals, but algo in the race at large. Conse- quently the institutions of education are, not only schools, colleges and universities, but also learned societies, the 296 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE public press, lyceums, public lectures, and whatever is adapted to promote the increase and diffusion of knowledge and the development of the human faculties. Under this head we have, therefore, a vast range of subjects, the inter- est of which is constantly increasing, and which have never yet been treated as a whole. These are such as the follow- ing: The organic nature of the family and of all other educational institutions in their interior relations, in those which they bear to the other teleological organs, and to society itself; the education of children and youth of both sexes, together with the methods and means by which this object can best be attained; the education of adults, the chief object of which is the development of particular faculties and special aptitudes for the practice of different trades, arts, professionsand pursuits, together with the means by which this object can be the most perfectly realized ; in fine, the education of society itself, regarded as a self-per- peéuating and ever-progressive form of organic life, the object of which is the development and culture of humanity to its highest attainable perfection and final destiny. 3. The third of these organs includes all the institutions of industry for the satisfaction of the want in man of material well-being. This form of wealth resolves itself, in the last analysis, into human control over the forces of nature and the properties of matter; and the attainment of it is the third special aim of society, as Divinely pre- scribed to man in the words: “ Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have domin- ion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” Here nature in its utmost extent is given to man, and he is commanded, through his associated energies and activities, to subdue it to his own uses and ends. Thus-he is author- ized by his Maker to acquire and possess material wealth, and is directed to the only source from which it can be procured, that is, the subjugation of nature. The sub- INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 297 jects included under this head, together with those under the first, constitute nearly the whole of that special depart- ment of social science which is called political economy. Those which require to be enumerated here are the follow- ing: ‘The nature of material wealth ; value and its meas- ures; the distinction between national and individual wealth —the former consisting in the sum of utilities, the latter in yalues; the production of wealth, the wealth-produc- ing power, that is, labor, skilled and unskilled, free and slave ; division and organization of labor; the industrial arts, capital and wages ; the instruments of production— tools, machinery and the domesticated animals; agricul- ture, or the occupation and improvement of land, the pro- duction of food and raw materials, land-tenures and rent; mines, forests and fisheries; manufactures, or the produc- tion of finished commodities; the distribution of wealth— commerce, home and foreign trade, free-trade and protec- tion, diversification of industry, political and industrial in- dependence of nations ; roads, canals, rivers and harbors; the media of exchange—money, credit, banks; checks upon the production and distribution of wealth, such as war and taxation ; the organic relations of all the institu- tions and branches of industry to each other, to the other teleological organs, and to society itself as the all-compre- hending organism. 4, The fourth in order of these organs includes all the institutions and appliances of art, that is to say, the beau- tiful or fine arts, the object of which is the satisfaction of those wants in man which arise out of his susceptibility to the charms of beauty. Under this head we have the fol- lowing and kindred subjects: The importance of art- culture to the welfare, happiness and perfection of man ; the influence of poetry, music, sculpture, painting, archi- tecture, the drama, public spectacles and amusements upon individual and national character; means for the promo- tion of art, and for the culture of the esthetic faculties: 13* 298 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE the significance of great municipal and national monu- ments of art, and its organic relations, d. The fifth of these organs includes all the institutions of civil government, the object of which is the realization of justice, order and general prosperity in society. In this department of social science, we have the following and kindred subjects: The nature, objects, powers and func- tions of government ; laws—municipal, constitutional, in- ternational ; the history of government from its origin in tribal associations through all its successive developments and forms—patriarchal, monarchical, despotic, aristocratic, republican, democratic and mixed; the progress of civil liberty, development of free institutions, and the organic relations of this to the other organs and to society, and of the different nations of the world to each other. 6. The sixth and last of these organs of society com- prises the institutions of religion. For religion is an essential and fundamental element of human nature, and the want of communion with God is an original want of the human soul, without the supply of which never yet has it been, nor ever can it be well with man. Religion, moreover, is essentially a social principle; pre-eminently the religious life as a communion; solitary asceticism is a wretched abuse of the moral and spiritual nature. Hence it is one of the special aims of society to make provision for the supply of this want by institutions for social wor- ship, and for the communion of the worshippers with each other. Under this head, although it has never before been included in any scheme of social science, we have all the subjects which pertain to religion socially considered. The foregoing analysis of the lawful and ordinate wants of man in the supply of which his welfare consists, and of the corresponding aims of society to supply these wants, and of the organs or institutions which embody and rep- resent these aims, and through which they are realized— this analysis is intended to be exhaustive, and to furnish INSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY 999 a scheme for the classification and exposition of all the phenomena of organic society. For there is no social fact or interest which does not naturally range itself under one or other of these comprehensive divisions. Of course, however, it does not lie in the power of any one man to fill out this vast scheme. Ach, Gott, art ist lange und kurtz ist unser leben! The laborers also as yet are comparatively few in this great harvest-field ; but they are constantly increasing, and each one who faithfully cultivates any little nook or corner of it contributes something to the crowning result, which must in time be realized. Hitherto, indeed, in this, as in every other department of knowledge, human progress has been painfully retarded by an enormous growth of prema- ture theories, with comparatively but little of harvested truth ; for crude theorizing has distorted, perverted, and even denied many of the most obvious and significant facts of social life. But all this must in time give way to the scientific methods of observation and induction, which have already led to the most encouraging results; nor have we any reason to doubt but that this most compre- hensive and most human of all the sciences will prove hereafter as productive of welfare and blessing to mankind as it is now full of promise and of hope. XV POPULATION And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. Tuts fruitfulness which was conferred on the first human pair, and through them upon mankind, is here declared to be a blessing. That it is truly such would seem to be indisputable when we consider that life is the one indispensable condition of all other blessings. Yet, perhaps, there is no declaration of the word of God against which more has been written, or which is still more confi- dently denied. For it has been strenuously maintained, and it is yet extensively believed, that this fruitfulness of the human race is a tremendous curse, and the cause of almost all the pauperism and degradation in the world. In support of this view, it is claimed by a whole school of political economists, that the constant relation between the natural increase of population and the possible supply of food is such that the earth’s productions necessarily tend to become less and less adequate to the support of its inhabitants. But we affirm that this statement rests upon mere speculation and analogy, and is contrary to all the facts of human experience; and this, we are persuaded, can be shown to the satisfaction of every candid mind. In the first place, then, there is a strong antecedent prob- ability against this speculation. In other words, there are rational grounds for a strong presumption that the Creator and Father of mankind, in His infinite fulness of wisdom, power and goodness, ‘whom giving does not impoverish 300 POPULATION 201 nor withholding enrich,’ has made ample provision for all the real necessities of His human children. This pre- sumption, moreover, is confirmed by the acknowledged fact, that all these wants, unless that of food be an excep- tion, have been actually provided for with a bountiful liberality. For the human powers of procreation are ac- knowledged to be ample for the supply of man’s want of society, or communion with his kind. For the satisfaction of our intellectual wants, we have all the facts and laws of nature, and the whole universe of truth and possible knowledge, in which no one has ever been mad enough to anticipate any deficiency. And for the supply of our moral and spiritual wants, we have all God’s revelations of him- self and of the spiritual world in His word, in His works of creation and providence, and in our souls—revelations which are absolutely inexhaustible. In fine, with respect to all our other physical wants, no deficiency of supply is ever supposed. All analogy, therefore, seems to warrant us in the belief that our heavenly Father has made pro- vision for this lowest yet most urgent necessity—that of food—with equal liberality. It seems irrational and even monstrous to suppose that an inordinate bounty on His part in supplying man’s want of communion with his kind should have led Him to endow the procreative powers in such excess that all the treasures of the earth, air and waters must be totally inadequate to the supply of food, and that consequently an ever-increasing proportion of human beings must perish from starvation. This argument, however, is only presumptive, and may not be regarded as sufficient to refute the analogies on which the counter-presumption of necessary starvation 1s itself chiefly founded. Among these, that which has exerted the greatest influence of late is drawn from the lower or- eanisms—animals and plants—among which, it is urged, . “a struggle for existence” is constantly going on, in which all the weaker organisms perish, and only the stronger 302 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE survive. This has been exhibited in elaborate detail by the followers of the late Charles Darwin, and by himself as follows: “A struggle for existence inevitably follows from the high rate at which all organic beings tend to increase. Every being which, during its natural lifetime, produces several egos or seeds must suffer destruction during some period of its life, or during some season or occasional year ; otherwise, on the principle of geometrical increase, its numbers would soon become so inordinately great that no country could support the product. Hence, as more individuals are produced than can possibly survive, there must in every case be a struggle for existence, either one individual with another of the same species, or with the in- dividuals of a distinct species, or with the physical condi- tions of life. It is the doctrine of Malthus applied with manifold force to the whole animal and vegetable king- doms; for, in this case, there can be no artificial increase of food, and no prudential restraint upon marriage. Al|- though some species may be now increasing more or less rapidly in numbers, all cannot do so, for the world would not hold them.’’* Now, although this may all be true of the lower organ- isms, it does not follow that it must be true of the highest of all, that is, man. If there be in the human world a struggle for existence similar to that which is here repre- sented as prevailing in the animal and vegetable kingdoms, it must be proved by’other arguments than this, and by such as are very different from any which analogy can fur- nish. For, evidently, there may be good reasons why it should prevail in the lower, and not in the higher realms of organic life; and one reason for the creation of lower organisms in such numbers that they cannot all live is ob- vious, namely, that vegetables are intended to serve as food * Darwin’s Origin of Species, p. 63. POPULATION 203 for animals and men, and animals as food for men and for each other. But human beings are not created to become food for each other, nor for the animals. For aught that appears, they were intended to live out the full term of their natural lives. The analogy, therefore, does not war- rant us to anticipate anything like so high a rate of increase for human beings as for other creatures. Accordingly we actually find it an indisputable law of organic development, that the lower forms of life increase and multiply with im- mensely greater rapidity than the higher. For no human pair can produce more than a few offspring, whilst a single fish-spawn contains literally millions of germs. Also we find that, among animals themselves, those which serve as food for others have commonly a higher rate of increase than those which prey upon them. The Greek historian, Herodotus, has an observation upon this point which seems worthy of being reproduced here; for in explanation of the causes which prevented the rapid multiplication of serpents in Arabia, he says: “I myself have observed this law of animal life, that the wise providence of God has made those creatures which are good for food very fruitful, as the hare, but those which are noxious, incapable of rapid multiplication, as the lion.”* or these and other similar reasons it may be, notwithstanding this analogy, that the human powers of procreation shall be found at last no more than adequate to supply the want of society, and to “replenish the earth and subdue it.” In the above quotation from Darwin, this theory of the relation between population and food is called “the doc- trine of Malthus,” for the reason that it originated with that celebrated author. But Malthus does not base it upon the preceding analogy, although, since his day, this has contributed more than all other arguments to its credibility and acceptance. He lays it down as a principle which * Herodotus, Book III. 107-109. 304 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE requires no proof, that the production of food can never increase faster than in an arithmetical ratio, 7. e. as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6; and that population naturally increases in a geo- metrical ratio, 7. e. as 2, 4, 8, 16, 32. Now this princi- ple is assumed by all his disciples as incontrovertible. We here deny it in both of its branches. We affirm that it rests upon purely speculative and hypothetical grounds. It has never been proved—the proof of it has never been formally attempted—it is incapable of proof. For, in the first place, no one has ever attempted to determine, in a scientific manner, the law of increase in the production of food of which the earth, air and waters are capable. The loose and general statements of Malthus himself do not even suggest the possibility of a scientific solution of the problem; and he makes no account whatever of the vast resources of modern agricultural chemistry, nor of the at- mosphere as an inexhaustible storehouse of nourishment for the support of organized beings, of which he was ne- cessarily ignorant. Nor have his followers, strange as it may appear, contributed anything to supply his deficiencies in this respect. For aught that appears, then, the increase in the production of food may be much greater than in an arithmetical ratio. In the second place, there are a great many natural checks upon the increase of population, from which no portion of the human race has ever been free, and which have never been determined in their number and efficiency. In the present state of our knowledge, they are incapable of being so determined. How, then, is it possible to establish a law of the increase of human beings in circumstances in which they have never been placed? Hence, for aught that appears, their natural in- crease may be much less than in a geometrical ratio. But, if it be conceded that the procreative powers of mankind, being conceived of as adequate to populate the whole earth from a single pair, must needs, if unchecked, tend to over-population, it does not follow that the required POPULATION 8305 restraints must come from the want of food. For other checks, which are in constant operation, may be amply suf- ficient to the end of time; and, if not, others still of greater efficiency may be developed as population advances. The all-wise Creator, who, by the operation of His immutable laws, stored away the coal in the earth thousands of years ago to meet the want which should arise from the destruc- tion of the forests, and the rock oil to be discovered when the whale should have begun to disappear, may have im- planted in the human constitution itself just those checks upon the increase of population which may be required hereafter, and which shall be developed at the proper time, when the waste lands of the globe shall be fully occupied and tilled to their utmost capacity of production. Some such pre-arrangement would be in perfect analogy with the wonderful facility which the physical constitution of man has always exhibited in adapting itself to the ever- varying circumstances and conditions of his earthly life, and is just what we might expect from the infinite wisdom, power and goodness of his Maker. The advocates of this doctrine, however, shut themselves up within much narrower limits than would be allowed them by the geometrical ratio of the increase of population and the arithmetical ratio of the increase of food. They undertake to show that this latter can never be so great, except, perhaps, for a very short time, and in exceptional circumstances, and that all the resources of emigration, whilst the greatest abundance of unoccupied land remains, are totally inadequate to supply the want of food which arises from over-population. These views are founded upon a certain theory of the rent of land, which was broached by obscure writers who preceded Malthus, which was adopted by him, and which was subsequently taken up by Mr. Ricardo, and formulated with detailed applica- tions. Hence it has come to be almost exclusively asso- ciated with Ricardo’s name. Presented in his own words, it is as follows: 306 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE “On the first settlement of a country in which there is an abundance of rich and fertile land, a very small propor- tion of which is required to be cultivated for the support of the actual population, or, indeed, can be cultivated with the capital which the population can command, there will be no rent; for no one would pay for the use of land when there was an abundant quantity not yet appropriated, and, therefore, at the disposal of whosoever might choose to cultivate it. On the common principle of supply and de- mand, no rent could be paid for such land... When, in the progress of society, land of the second degree of fertility is taken into cultivation, rent immediately commences on that of the first quality, and the amount of that rent will depend on the difference in the quality of these two por- tions of land. When land of the third quality is taken into cultivation, rent immediately commences on the second, and it is regulated as before by the difference in their pro- ductive powers. At the same time, the rent of the first quality will rise, for that must always be above the rent of the second by the difference between the produce which they yield with a given quantity of capital and labor. With every step of the progress of population, which shall oblige a country to have recourse to land of a worse quality to enable it to raise its supplies of food, rent on all the more fertile land will rise.” * Such, then, is Ricardo’s world-famous theory of rent, which has been vaunted by great authorities as the most important contribution to political economy made since the time of Adam Smith, and upon which this doctrine of starvation is founded. J. Stewart Mill, one of the most authoritative writers on this subject, speaks of it in the following words: ‘This general law of agricultural indus- try is the most important principle in political economy, * Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, by David Ricardo, Esq., London, 1817, pp. 52-55. POPULATION 807 Were the law different, nearly all the phenomena of the production and distribution of wealth would be different.” Let these statements be borne in mind, for if it can be shown that there is no such law, the Ate system of the production and distribution of wealth which is here founded on it must fall to the ground. Now the first and most obvious objection to it is, that it is altogether hypothetical and speculative, a pure @ priort Heinen an assumption without a shadow of proof. Its authors and supporters rest it wholly on the antecedent probability. They simply assert that men, being rational, would choose and settle first on the richest inne ; eran they always have done, and always will do so. Not one of them seems ever to have thought of examining into the history of new settlements to see in what order superior and inferior soils have actually been occupied. If they had made such an historical examination, they would have found, as we shall presently see, that their assumption was directly opposed to.all the facts of the case. Here, then, is a great system of political economy vauntingly founded ona purely speculative notion, an unwarranted assumption. The second objection is, that a precisely opposite assump- tion may be made to appear quite as plausible, and, indeed, far more probable, on similar @ priori grounds. Let us look at some of these for a moment. For when men come to settle in new countries, they are necessarily few in numbers, and are comparatively destitute of capital and the appliances of civilization. If the first oc- cupants be a tribe of savages, which commonly has been the case, they support themselves by hunting and fishing, after that by pasturage, and do not till the ground at all, or only in the feeblest manner. Under such conditions, population is necessarily very sparse. or it has been roughly computed that one half-acre of cultivated land will furnish as much food as eight hundred acres of forest and stream to hunters and fishers. When cultivation begins 308 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE under any circumstances, farming implements are of the rudest construction, and even these are difficult to be ob- tained. The sparseness of population precludes the mass- ing of numbers in co-operation for the accomplishment of great agricultural enterprises. Consequently, the first prac- tical question for new settlers is, not where they can find the deepest and richest soils, but where it is possible for them, with their rude implements and paucity of numbers, to overcome the resistance of nature, and to eke out a bare subsistence for themselves and their families. And this resistance of nature is always greatest where her strength is greatest, 7. e. where the soil is richest. Dank and pes- tilential vapors fill the valleys, whose natural growths also are the heaviest timber or impenetrable jungles, the cover of ferocious beasts and noxious reptiles. Here a vast work of clearing and draining must be done before the soil can be rendered productive of food for man, to which the force of new-settlers is totally inadequate ; and if it were other- wise, they and their families would probably be cut off the first year by the malaria which floats along the slug- gish streams. The next best soils extend for some distance up the sides of the valleys and lower slopes of the hills. But, here also, the timber is commonly too heavy to be cleared away by the new-settler’s imperfect tools and inad- equate force of numbers. Hence, whatever may be his wishes, he is compelled to pass by these also, and to com- mence the work of cultivation upon the light and thin soils of the upland slopes, where there is no malaria, no heavy timber, nor thick jungle, where no drainage is required, where the soil can be immediately worked with his inade- quate force and implements, and where it will afford him the speediest though scanty returns—* returns, however, which are immeasurably in advance of all that could be obtained by his savage or nomad predecessors, who roamed over a thousand times greater space, and depastured the natural grasses with their flocks and herds.” POPULATION 309 Now ‘it is the first step which costs.’ For when the new-settler’s first crop is gathered from his thin soil, he has, notwithstanding, a store which will last him till the next harvest, and which gives him some leisure to improve his tools and accommodations. This improvement, and the natural increase of his live stock, render the next year’s labors somewhat more productive: and thus, year by year, he is enabled more thoroughly to till the ground, still further to improve his agricultural implements, to clear more and better land, and to extend his plantation. In the meantime, his children are growing up around him, taking part in his labors, and increasing his force, by whose aid he is now enabled to clear away heavier timber, and to bring under cultivation deeper and richer soil. Thus we see that, as population advances from generation to genera- tion, the progress of settlement and tillage is naturally from lighter and poorer soils to those which are heavier and richer, which extend down into the swamps and bot- toms of the valleys. The richest lands, where the strength and resistance of nature are greatest, where a gigantic work of clearing and draining is indispensable, must needs be the last which are reached, when population has become the most dense, and appliances of civilization the most nu- merous and efficient. Such, in brief, is the @ priori argument which is opposed to the assumption upon which Ricardo’s theory is founded. Certainly it is no less probable than that which it is ad- duced to refute, and a system of political economy of an entirely opposite character might be as legitimately built upon it. But, thus far, we have only one 4 priort theory set off against another; and whatever is worthy of the name of science can make no further use of such specula- tions than to raise from them the inquiry whether the con- clusions to which they point are, or are not, in accordance with observed and verified facts. Hence it is necessary to inquire here, what has been the actual history of new set- 310 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE tlements? Do the facts of the case show that they have been made on the ricber or poorer soils? Have increasing populations proceeded from the former to the latter, or from the latter to the former ? The first writer who undertook to submit Ricardo’s theory to the test of facts was Henry C. Carey. In his Principles of Social Science, he has given us a vast his- torical induction, in the course of which he traces the his- tory of new settlements in the United States and their territories, in Mexico, South America, the West Indies, Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, and most other countries, wherever any facts bearing on this subject are accessible. It is impossible here to do any sort of justice to this splendid historical argument. It should be read and studied by every one in the author’s own works. But a few indisputable facts, as examples, may be here enumerated. In England, then, those parts of the country which, in the time of Richard cur de lion, were forests and swamps are now under the highest and most productive cultiva- tion. ‘The morasses of South Lancastershire, which had nearly swallowed up the army of William the Conqueror, are now among the most productive lands of the kingdom. The Lincoln Fens, which Cromwell tried to drain by the labor of his Dutch prisoners, and failed, together with the border counties between England and Scotland, which two centuries ago were ‘the haunt and refuge of “the bold moss trooper,’ are now drained by wind and steam hy- draulics, and are proverbial for their fertility. Every- where the lands most recently brought under cultivation are those which have required the heaviest outlay of capital, especially in the form of machinery, to reclaim them. Such lands, in general, were totally irreclaimable before the invention of the steam-engine. Even on the prairies of the United States and Territories, where there is no timber nor jungle, it is found that the lightest soils POPULATION 811 are first occupied, and the heaviest not until population has much increased.* In general, we find on examination of the facts that the most productive soils are not brought under cultivation, except where population has become dense ; where it is sparse, tillage recedes from the river- banks, and runs along the ridges and crests of the hills ; in proof of which, we see, also, that the old roads wind from hill-top to hill-top, regardless of the increased dis- tance, and of the labor of ascent and descent, connecting the scattered villages and sparse settlements: whilst the modern railway connects great cities, plunging through forests and swamps, wholly or comparatively destitute of population, which, however, soon follows its course, until the jungle and timber are cleared away, the swamps drained, and villages, towns and cities take their place. In this way, the deepest, heaviest and most productive soils are last. brought under cultivation. The result of this examination demonstrates that Ricardo’s theory of the occupation of land cannot stand the test of indisputable facts, and that its precise contrary is true. This conclusion, moreover, is confirmed, and the whole Malthusian doctrine of starvation is refuted, by another class of facts of still greater significance. ‘These are brought out by the question, whether increasing popu- lations have actually produced and enjoyed a decreasing proportion of food for each mouth? For it is easy to show that precisely the opposite of this is true. Ricardo’s theory, then, as applied by himself and ac- * “The soil of the dry prairie is from twelve to eighteen inches deep... the wet prairie in general much deeper, and the alluvion of the river-bot- toms often of astonishing depth.... To constitute dry prairie it must be rolling. Between the waves of this great ocean .... are the sloughs, the terror of the early emigrant, and the most valued possession of his suc- cessor.... These sloughs are the drains of the dry prairie.... Many small tracts known as wet prairie fifteen years ago, and rejected by the first settlers, are now brought under cultivation.” —Report of the American Pomological Society, 1849. 312 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE cepted by all Malthusians, gives us the following results : A colony, suppose of one hundred persons in families, settle in a new country on the richest land it affords, which yields them, for the first crop, say, 1000 bushels of wheat, ten bushels for each mouth. In 25 years, the population, say, will have doubled, which will require them to culti- vate a double portion of land, the additional part of which must, of course, be of inferior quality. This yields, say, 900 bushels, giving for the whole crop 1900 bushels, and but 9.5 bushels for each mouth. Another 25 years, popu- lation again doubled, amounting to 400 persons, requiring double the quantity of land, the addition being of still inferior quality. The whole crop now is 3500 bushels, yielding 8.75 bushels for each mouth. Still another 25 years, population 800, food 7.8 bushels for each mouth. Thus we have a constantly decreasing proportion of food as population advances. Now all this is on the most favorable supposition which the theory allows, namely, that each person of the 800 occupies as much land as did each of the 100 at first. But if the land be limited in quantity, so that the increased population cannot obtain as much of it as their ancestors occupied, this decrease in the proportion of food for each mouth must be in so far accelerated, and, still further, by the tendency (assumed by all these writers) of cultivation to exhaust the natural fertility of the soil. Such are the inevitable and ac- knowledged consequences of the theory. Now, upon examination of the facts of the case, no such consequences appear in the history of increasing populations, but the contrary, namely, that increasing populations produce an increasing amount of food for each mouth. Here, also, Mr. Carey has given us a vast and splendid historical induction, of which only a few facts can be mentioned here as examples. Upon this question, we have the best information con- cerning France from the time of Louis XIV, 1700 to POPULATION 313 Louis Philippe, 1840, a period of 140 years, for which the tables compiled by the head of the statistical bureau of the government give us the following facts: 1. The whole population of the country nearly doubled—lacking only 3,000,000. 2. The whole product of food nearly quadrupled : in other words, a population less than twice as dense produced four times as much food, and, conse- quently, more than twice as much for each mouth. But it is of importance, also, that we should know how this increased product of food was actually distributed, and what, during this time, was the condition of the poor. From these tables, then, we find that the landlords and capitalists received in 1700 for their share of the whole product, two-thirds of it, or twice as much as the laborers, the actual tillers of the soil, whilst, in 1840, these latter re- ceived three-fifths of the whole, one-fifth more than the landlords and capitalists. This, however, does not indicate that the landlords received less in absolute amount; for so great was the increased production during this interval that in 1840 two-fifths of the whole were far greater in absolute amount than were three-fifths in 1700. Notwithstanding, or rather because the laborers were so much better paid, the absolute amount received by the non-agricultural por- tion of the people increased one hundred and twenty-seven per centum, whilst their numbers had only doubled. Again, the whole cost of cultivating the soil during this period, in- creased more than seven fia the proportion of this which was paid in wages nearly doubled; the proportion for each individual nearly trebled ; and the daily wages received by each individual of the Pculinell families nearly quadru- pled. Once more, the wages of an agricultural family in 1700 were one hundred and thirty-five franks per year, whilst the cost of wheat enough to give them bread was two hundred and fifty-four franks, leaving a deficit to be made up with acorns, chestnuts and other such materials of one hundred and nineteen franks, while the wages of such a family in 14 314 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 1840, were five hundred franks, and the cost of wheat enough to give them bread, was two hundred and fifty-six franks —an excess of wages over the cost of bread of two hundred and forty-four franks, to provide them with clothing, shel- ter, and other necessaries. Thus it appears that under Louis XIV the rural popu- lation of France wanted bread half the time ; intermediate statistics show that under Louis XV they had bread two days out of three ; whilst under Louis Philippe, they had bread every day, and a constantly increasing surplus of wages for other necessaries. Itis true, indeed, that during all this time they had food of some sort, at least, those of them that escaped starvation. But their bread was made of inferior grains, of chestnuts, acorns, fern, and even worse materials ; nor could they obtain enough of these to prevent multitudes of them from perishing. One of the ministers of Louis XV has left the following record: “At the mo- ment when I write, in the month of February, 1739, with appearances promising a harvest, if not abundant, at least passable, men die around us like flies, and are reduced by poverty to eat grass :” and the Duke of Orleans carried a loaf of fern-bread into the king’s council to show his maj- esty what his subjects lived upon. Few persons now are aware upon what wretched food the masses of the people lived in “ those good old times.” In these tables we have also a comparison between the more and the less populous districts of France, with similar results. We cannot go over these details here. It must suffice to state that they show a constantly increasing pro- portion of food produced, and actually distributed to each person, as the population increased in density, and a de- creasing proportion as it became more sparse. In the words of a I’rench economist: “ If we compare together the ten most populous and the ten least populous departments, it appears from official statistics that, in the former, the yield for each person is more in quantity and better in quality to POPULATION 315 the extent of thirty per centum in weight of grain than in the latter ; and there is a similar disproportion in all other products besides grain.” Thus we see that, in those por- tions of France where the population was most dense, there was produced about a third more food for each mouth than in those where the population was most sparse. With respect to the other European countries, we have not such full statistical information, but we have a vast body of general facts which necessarily involve similar re- sults, and some of these are more significant than any yet given. Thus the following statements are from Adam Smith, the founder of political economy as a science, al- though some of them are well known to all readers of gen- . eral history: “ Under the feudal governments, the tillers of the soil were commonly bondsmen, or tenants at will. Both their persons and services were at the disposal of the feudal lord, to whom, therefore, all the produce belonged. But, in the present state of Europe, the share of the land- lord seldom exceeds a third, sometimes not a fourth part. Yet the rent of lands, that is, the share of the whole prod- uce received by the landlords, in all the improved parts of the country, has tripled and quadrupled in absolute amount since the ancient times; and this third or fourth part received by the landlords is, it seems, three or four times greater than the whole formerly was. Rent, though in the progress of improvement, it increases in absolute amount, diminishes in proportion to the whole produce of the land.” Hence it follows that the other two-thirds or three-fourths of the whole produce, which do not go for rent, remain to be divided between the farmer and the la- borer; and this must be six or eight times greater than the whole formerly was, whilst the population of no country in Europe is three times as great as it was five hundred years ago. From the statements of Malthus himself, forty years after Adam Smith, it would appear that the whole product 316 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE of the soil, and the proportion of it received by the labor- ers, had still further increased during that interval of rapid improvement. Tor he states: ‘ According to the returns lately made to the board of agriculture, the average pro- portion which rent bears to the whole produce seems not to exceed one-fifth; whereas, formerly, the proportion amounted to one-fourth, one-third, or even two-fifths. Still, however, although the landlord has a less share of the whole produce, this less share, from the very great increase of the whole which has arisen from the progress of improvement, yields a larger quantity.” Now, if one- fifth, at this time, was greater than two-fifths had been formerly, the whole product was more than doubled; and, of this whole, four-fifths were received by the laborer and farmer: all this in the face of what his theory required. How this inconsistency is disposed of we shall see here- after—it is not the least wonderful thing connected with the subject. In like manner, Mr. Senior, one of the ablest of this school of economists, in 1836, thus estimates the improve- ments which had taken place in England and in the south- ern parts of Scotland during the preceding sixty years : “ Population doubled, wages of labor more than doubled, rent nearly trebled,” 7. e. in absolute amount. These are only a few examples of a vast multitude of facts which have been adduced in disproof of this theory, that increasing populations must necessarily produce a constantly decreasing quantity of food for each mouth ; and these are crowned by one acknowledged fact, which we claim is sufficient itself to refute the theory, and to overthrow the whole system of political economy which is founded on it. For the most populous of the countries of Europe is Belgium, and it is an undisputed fact, that the economic condition of the people of that country is the best in Europe. There pauperism and distress from want of food are almost unknown. Enough and more is POPULATION O17 produced and distributed to all the inhabitants, and large quantities are constantly exported. Here, then, we have a demonstration that there is no such thing as over-popu- lation in Europe; and that, wherever pauperism exists, it is due to other causes, namely, to false and wrong social arrangements. or even in the great Irish famine, during which, perhaps, a million of human beings perished from starvation, the exportation of food from the country in large quantities was constantly going on. It was not that Ireland did not produce food enough for its inhabitants that they perished, but because they had nothing to buy it with ; and the reason of this was their want of a suffi- ciently diversified industry, which had been destroyed by free competition with the more advanced industries of England. Here, now, the question arises, how do the Malthusian economists deal with these facts? ‘The answer is, that they frankly admit them, and undertake to reconcile them to their theory. Some quotations to this effect have al- ready been given. In addition, Mr. Senior states: “Since the beginning of the eighteenth century [136 years] the population of England has about doubled; the produce of the land has certainly tripled, probably quadrupled.” Also Mr. McCulloch says: ‘Let any one compare the state of this, or any other country of Europe, with what it was 300 or 100 years ago, and he will be satisfied that prodigious advances have been made; that the means of subsistence have increased much more rapidly than popu- lation, and that the laboring classes are now generally in possession of conveniences and luxuries that were formerly not enjoyed by the richest lords.” These admissions, however, as has been said, are not understood by these economists to invalidate the & priort theory to which they have been so long and so fully com- mitted. They seem to believe that one theory is worth a thousand facts, and if the facts cannot be made to square 318 WISDOM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE with the theory, so much the worse for the facts. Thus Mr. Mill, admitting that the facts of modern times are against the law of decreasing food, goes on to say: “ This, however, does not prove that the law of which we are speaking does not exist, but only that there is some antag- onizing principle at work, making head against the law. Such an agency there is in habitual antagonism to the law of diminishing returns from the land. . . It is no other than the progress of civilization.” [sic]. But he comes to the conclusion that this law, constantly operating, must in time overcome the “antagonizing principle.” So also Mr. Mc- Culloch: “From the operation of fixed and permanent causes, the increasing sterility of the soil is sure, in the long run, to over-match the improvements that occur in machinery and cultivation.” Now these statements are little less than prodigious. For, here, it is flatly conceded that this boasted law does not hold good in an advancing civilization; that, for more than two centuries of the most rapid increase of population ever known, the progress of civilization has been more than a match for it. What, then, becomes of it in all past time if, in the human race taken as a whole, civilization has always been advancing? And what becomes of it for the future if civilization should continue to advance? The former of these suppositions is now almost or quite univer- sally maintained by scientists, and certainly the latter is incapable of being disproved. Here, then, this boasted “law of diminishing returns from the land” is conceded to be no law at all of the actual facts, but something which might, could, would or should be a law, if it were not for —what? Why, the progress of civilization, forsooth!