Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

will doubtless prevail in the end over the determined opposition of the House of Lords; for the workingmen led by Gladstone and backed by the Commons and public opinion, are no longer to be despised. The Lords must yield or be swept away by the rising storm. Bad then as the present condition of the laboring classes in England may be, we are justified in hoping that the worst has been, and that the tendency to better things will continue.

The large emigration is itself a hopeful sign. Its benefit is not so much in that every one that leaves makes a place for another, as it is that it shows English capitalists that now since modern invention has made migration so easy and America offers so many inducements to English operatives, England must ameliorate more and more the condition of her workmen, if she would keep them at home and away from the workshops of competing nations.

The abuse of a discovery of modern science will tend to make England persevere in her good resolution to give labor its fair share of remuneration-the discovery of dynamite. Labor is no longer powerless. With dynamite so easily made, concealed, and exploded, labor, if prohibited from social recognition, excluded from political rights, kept in ignorance of and aloof from religion, poorly paid, fed, and housed, crowded out of the country into the purlieus of the cities, crazed with rum, defying in its desperation all right and justice, may blow up raw material and machinery, capital and capitalists, overseers and all, into disorganization and anarchy, if not into annihilation.

English conscience and English interest are now seen to be one in the demand that the English laboring classes shall have their share in the outcome of English life. English conscience and English interest working at cross purposes have accomplished strange things in history. But when both work together they never fail of their purpose.

But what if the English working classes gain knowledge and power divorced from morality and religion? What if they have not self-restraint and self-direction? What if now they get the power and use it to settle old scores and take sweet vengeance? The thought makes the world tremble. Despo

tism embodied in a Charles I. could be wounded to death by the headman's axe; but if the myriad-headed populace should become the despot, who could play the part of executioner?

Secular and technical education are good so far as they go. Food and raiment and a place to lay one's head are essential; but the laboring classes cannot "live by bread alone." "A man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things that he possesseth." Self-restraint and self-reliance can only be secured by the soul's recognition of and submission to the power and beauty of the moral law, eternally executing itself, as embodied in a personal God of justice and of love.

There are two kinds of agnosticism, that of the philosopher and that of the multitude; they seem alike, but their similarity is the similarity of extremes. The philosophical agnostic is the one who has rejected the idea of God that has been calmly scrutinized. The agnosticism of the laboring classes is that of those who have not so much as heard whether there be any deity; the name they have heard, but the real content of the idea of God has never occurred to them.

But here too is there ground for hope. There has been great increase in Great Britain of attendance upon Sunday schools, there being according to the latest returns an attendance of 5,217,000 scholars. General Booth with his Salvation Army, and Moody and Sankey with their gospel songs and homely phrases have been each in his own way preaching the gospel to the poor, healing the broken-hearted, preaching deliverance to captives and recovering of sight to the blind, setting at liberty them that are bruised. Good Samaritans have found the workingman to be their neighbor. Thousands have heard and believed, promise and first fruits of more to follow.

Jesus, the carpenter, communicated his own thoughts, his own emotions, his own purposes, to John, the fisherman, who lay in his bosom; by so doing John was made rich in thought, in emotion, in purpose; but Jesus was none the poorer for all he gave. Whatsoever of thought or feeling or purpose John received from Jesus he in turn gave to another, having freely received he freely gave; but in giving he lost nothing of it all. By giving he rather increased his own knowledge, emotion, and purpose.

Suppose the Hon. John Bright, as no doubt he may have done, should take his best thought, his most thrilling emotion, his noblest purpose, and communicate it from his own brain to the brain of one of his workmen, from his own heart to the workman's heart, from his own will to the workman's will; what would be the result of such communism as this? Would the Hon. John Bright be any the poorer? Would not he and the workman be both the richer? Suppose that the England, which John Bright so fully represents, should take the workingman to its own bosom and communicate to his brain, to his heart, to his will, England's own best thought, best emotion, best purpose, would this England be any the poorer? Would not the workingman be infinitely richer? Here is Christian communism; break this loaf to the English workingman and he will no longer cry for a stone!

Grand old England! What wonders has she not wrought? She has girdled the earth with her colonies and whitened every sea with her sails, and filled the earth with the products of her industry; she has battled victoriously for civil and religious freedom. She is our mother; God bless her! All this has she wrought with nearly a million paupers, with her laboring classes ostracized from good society, excluded from political power, deprived of education, destitute of religion, poorly paid, fed, clothed, and housed, driven from the country and penned up in the cities, with one-tenth of her vitality annually sacrificed to the demon of rum. What would she not have accomplished had she been freed from this terrible incubus? What will she not accomplish when in the near future her laboring classes shall be crowned with manhood, freed from the slavery of rum, liberally paid, properly clothed, fed, and sheltered in a home, when they and their children shall be educated, when social standing and political power may be safely put in their hands, when religion shall bind them with cords of love to a God whom they recognize as their Father and the Father of

men!

ARTICLE VIII.-IMMORTALITY AND EVOLUTION.

Is it possible for a man convinced of the truth of the law of Evolution, to believe in individual immortality? The scientific specialist as a rule answers the question decidedly in the negative. The man whose one desire is to keep up with the ideas usually called advanced, accepts his dictum, and talks contemptuously of the superstition of the past. The truly broad and catholic thinker, a George Eliot or an Emerson, is driven to a position of unstable equilibrium and negative doubt, practically equivalent to unbelief. The intelligent Christian holds the two truths side by side in his mind, carefully preventing any contact between them. That there is yet another possible position, which views the belief in a future life as positively strengthened by a clear comprehension of the law of progress, it is the object of the present paper to show.

With the alleged contradictions between Evolution and Immortality, this is not the place to deal. They all rest on the assumption that the correlative development of brain and mind points to the non-existence of mind as a separate entity, and hence to the impossibility of its existence after the dissolution of the body. How groundless is this assumption, may best be shown by one or two quotations. "The utmost possibility for us is an interpretation of the process of things as it presents itself to our limited consciousness," says Spencer. "Carried to whatever extent, the inquiries of the psychologist do not reveal the ultimate nature of mind." "The relation of thought to a material brain is no metaphysical necessity," writes J. S. Mill, "but simply a constant co-existence within the limits of observation. . There is, therefore, in science, no evidence against the immortality of the soul, but that negative evidence which consists in the absence of evidence in its favor."

Leaving, then, all attempt at the reconcilement of two things which cannot be directly compared, let us see what results from considering the two sciences as complemental, and

bearing to each other something the same relation as does biology to mineralogy.

In the first place, it must be clearly understood that by immortality we mean to imply continuance of individual conscious existence after death. The word has shared the fate of many others, in being appropriated of late years by a school of thinkers who desire to keep the religious emotions which have formed the noblest incentives to action in the past, while sacrificing the definite intellectual beliefs which have formed the basis of those emotions. But the attenuated theory which sees in the belief in immortality only an assertion of the somewhat trite fact that the influence of our lives is destined to be unending, is not that which we shall adopt in the present paper. We accept the Christian hypothesis in its fullest significance; and this it is which we desire to study in the light of scientific truth.

To begin with, we must postulate the fact that law, in this visible, tangible world, is continuous. Phenomena vary, but force is constant, and it is on this truth that all our science depends. Destroy the continuity of law, and you destroy all possibility of a rational, inductive science. Now the phenomena of that other world whose reality is claimed by the believer, are manifestly separated by a sharp line of division from those of the visible. If we find no trace of the action of familiar laws,- if these novel phenomena are apparently governed by entirely new forces, having no continuity with the old, the unity of our cosmic theory will be destroyed. Our belief in the super-sensible world will not indeed be annihilated; but we shall hold it in opposition to all analogy, and contrary to the principles of inductive science.

It will not surprise us to find that there is contradiction between these two departments of science. All the conditions lead us to expect it. Investigated at different times in the world's history; the one a belief of eighteen hundred years standing, the other a theory of yesterday; the one held with the greatest ardor of faith by those whom the world calls mystics, the other first formulated by men whose contempt for any pretense of knowledge concerning a world other than the physical was barely veiled; each believed for years by its

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »