Scientific Christianity: A Study in the Biology of Character ...

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Preface

In placing before the serious student of the phenomena usually termed * spiritual/ the following attempt to analyse some of the phases of those phenomena, I wish to express my indebtedness to two great English writers in veiy difiEerent spheres.

In the first place, I desire to thank Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for his kind interest in the original manuscript, and for the suggestion made by him which is responsible for the form this book has taken.

In the second place, I wish to acknowledge the debt that every student of heredity owes to Dr Archdall Reid, whose brilKant writings on this subject have so stimulated the thoughts of many. I have quoted freely from his great work * The Principles of Heredity/ wherever his arguments bear upon the problem .of this book, and those arguments have all the greater weight because urged in support of entirely different contentions.

The effort made in these pages is to show that via SCIENTIFIC CHRISTIANITY

the whole nature of man is governed by one identical set of laws, which have hitherto been studied and applied in relation to only one part of his nature. The outcome of the alignment is that the character and personality of a man, including his spiritual nature, is a biological rather than a theological problem, and must therefore be studied upon biological lines.

There is no theology in this book and the writer is no theologian, but it is just possible that in the efforts made to establish Theology there has been too little seeking after Truth. It seems not unlikely that the Churches of to-day will find themselves faced by the fact, that they have lost their influence with thoughtful men while they have been fighting among themselves for the shadow of sectarian supremacy.

At any rate there are not a few who, like the writer, are convinced that the future evolution of mankind, if it is to be in the direction of higher ethical progress, can only be attained by means of a more Scientific Christianity.

Gerald Leighton.

EDniBUSOBy Jam. ipxa

Part I Chapter I Ths Problem •••••- 3

Sdenoe and Christianity — ^What Problem does this involve ? — Some general Principle at Work which prodaces great Lives — The Why and the How — The present menta] Attitude to Dogma — Necessity for scientific Statement <^ Religion — Proves.* A religious Ideas — A common modem Experience— The Use and Abuseof Analogy — ^TheProblemstated.

Chapter II Ths Making Op A Man • • • • 55

Variation of Individuals — ^What makes an Individual — ^A biological Task — Early Development — Continuity of Germ-plasm — ^The Line of heredity — First Conclusion — Factors of Development — Second Conclusion — ^Third Conclusion — Summary — Illustration from Character of Alexander Pope — ^Analysis of Traits — Conclusion arrived at.

CHAPTER III THB MAKINO OF A MAN {conttnued) • • • . 7^

Qnalitative Estimate of Material in an Individual— Fhysical, Mental, Moral, Characteristics — ^Limitation of physical Acquirements — Scope of mental Acquirements — Darwin's Opinion of his own mental Proceues — ^Effect of A^e— -The real intellectual Giants are Uttie Children — Parental Love^ Modesty, Moralitv, — not Instincts but Acquirements of the Mind — ^Fear and Hate — ^Most Traits acquired— Inherited Tendencies — Sammary«

X SCIENTIFIC CHRISTIANITY

Chapter IV

What does ' Soul ' mean ? — Is it bom Perfect or does it Develop ? — Is it Personality ? — ^The Capacity to develop a Soul — ^A gradual Process — ^Perhaps a sudden Manifestation*

Part II Chapter V The Explanatiok . . .109

The Search for some Universal Law — ^Not for Analoey — ^How does Man advance towards Physical, Mentu, Moral, and Spiritual Perfection ? — ^The Case of Disease — Physical Disease and natural Resistance — Immunity — Definitions of Immunity — Physical Immunity, Moral Immunity, Mental Immunity* Spiritual Immunity; with Examples-^ Susceptibility defined, and Examples — Kadal, spednc, and individual Differences m Immunity and Susceptibility.

Chapter VI

The Case of Tuberculosis — ^What causes racial Deterioration ? — ^The Case of Measles — First Conclusion—Acquired Immunity — Tabular Summary of the Facts and Laws of Immunity.

Chapter VII The Case Of Alcoholism -134

An Agent of Elimination and Selection — ^Dr Archdall Retd on Alcoholism — ^Why Men difier — Why some are Sober and some Drunken.

Chapter VIII The Case Of Opium . • . . • 150

The Efiect on various Races of Opium — ^Tobacco not an eUminating Agent — ^Why ? — Difierence of Immunity — ^The Acquisition cd liabit.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER IX yACB

THS CASS or YAJUOUS PHYSICAL AGSNCISS 156

Food and Diet — ^Air and Ventilation — ^Exercise and Exertion — ^Work — ^Heat, Cold, and Climate—- Condnsion as to Man's physical Nature — Schema of a physical IndividuaUty.

Chapter X The Making Of A Man's Mind • • 166

Mental Characters — ^Nature of Brain changes not known — Three Modes of mental Functumin^ — The dual Mind — ObjectiveandSubjecttve— Instmct — Reason — Essential Difference— The great Characteristic of the Human Mind — ^Language an Aoguirement, the Capunty to learn Inborn — ^Mental Susceptibility and Immunity — ^What is Inborn mentally ? — ^Variation of mental Standard — ^Tha Plasticity of Mind — ^What is Man mentally.

Chapter XI Mbntal Immunity • • • 187

How to lead the greatest Mental Life — ^Education and Scholastic Methods — Qualifications for Teaching — ^The Science of Thinkmg — Faulty Methods — The Scientific Method — Facts taught should be true and useful — ^The Essential Thing is the Method of Teaching — Example — ^The Necessity for Ccncentration.

Chapter XII

What is Taught— How it is Taught— The Effects produced — ^Tne Effect of Doffmar— How to teach Keligion to Children — ^Mental Acquisition — ^Harm done to Minds of Children b^ suppressing the Truth -—Adulteration of the Mmd — -Immunity in the Mental Sphere — ^The greatest Mental life.

Chapter XIII

Individual Morality and Immunity — ^Variation in Individuals^— The Power of Resistance puHy labom, and the Capacity lor its Development-* xii SCIENTIFIC CHRISTIANITY

Nature's Method — ^Mental Immorality — Pride- Envy — ^Uncharitableness — ^L3riDg — ^Assodatioa ol Mind and Body, mental with physicaL

CHAPTER XIV MORAL IlfHUNiry {continued)

Morality an Acooirement — ^Absence in Infant— Phyricai Immoralities are specific just as Diseases— Molality governed by Law of Immunity.

CHAPTER XV SMOnOKAL IMMUNITY . • • •

Various Kinds of Emotion — ^Love and Friendship — ^Their Modes of Origin — ^Their Development- Factors concerned — Immunity to Love— Love ' at first sight ' — ^Emotions governed by Law of Immunity.

Part III The Application Chapter XVII

Rdi^ous Individuality the sum total of Immumties and Susceptibilities — The Claim of Christ — ^His Offer to Man — ^A scientific Offer — ^Two Methods of Treatment, curative and preventive, the former temporary, the latter permanent — ^The Advantage and Disadvantage ot these Methods respectively — Sudden ' Conversions ' — Emotional ana Temporary — Christ used both Methods,

CHAPTER XVIII THB SaSNCE IN CHRISTIANITY . • •386

The Spiritual Life in response to the stimuli of Food, use and Injury — ^The Responsibility upon everyone who hinders Spiritual (Growth by denying Opportunity for ' Use — ^What was once can bt ■gain — ^The Mi^ immune to Sin.

Chapter I

Not many years ago — the oldest among us can readily recall the time — ^and the association of the two words ' Scientific Christianity ' would have soimded in the ears of the majority as a contradiction in terms. It may do so still, to an everdiminishing number. To most of us the words suggest a recollection of a period of bitter conflict and hard words, in which such names as those of Huxley and Gladstone stand out prominently. Still there are one or two questions which at the present day are very apt to come to the surface of men's minds, and which have not yet been very clearly nor definitely answered. Those questions present themselves to thinking people somewhat as follows : — ^what is the relationship between

SCIENCE AND CHRISTIANITY ? WHAT HAS SCIENCE TO DO WITH RELIGION ? IS THERE A PLACE FOR SCIENCE IN THE RELIGION OF CHRIST? WHAT IS THE SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION OF RELIGIOUS

PHENOMENA ? In some such words, spoken or thought, is this problem shaping itself in the minds of many to-day.

It is important to realise what an immense change has taken place in the space of a single generation in connection with the relative positions of Science and Christianity. As we have said, it is not so long ago when the two seemed to be in the most violent and open opposition and hostility. Most men of science were thought to be — and in many cases probably were — absolute materialists, and the epithet of ' atheist ' was commonly appUed to them. That was sueceeded by the word descriptive of the mind which no longer denied but admitted ignorance, namely, ' agnostic' The candid statement that ' we do not know,' was very often accompanied by the further attitude (not so candidly stated), ' neither are we interested.'

To-day all this is changed, and it is not too much to say that, in English-speaking lands at least, it is the rule rather than the exception to find men of the very highest position in the scientific world closely associating themselves with religious movements, and identif3dng themselves with those to whom Christianity is the one thing of supreme importance. It is but a few short years since we saw men like the late beloved Henry Drununond in close friendship and alliance with evangelists like Moody and Sankey, working on a common platform with one conunon aim, namely.

to endeavour to peisuade men that it was possible for them to live the greatest life. It was beginning to dawn upon the world that it was becoming impossible for these two parts of the mentsd equipment to live for ever divorced, and that there must be some way — ^if it could only be foimd — ^in which Science and Christianity could be shown to have a conmion element, necessary to both, and bringing both into their true position with reference to each other.

It was the age of Science. In every department of human activity old methods of thought and action were being discarded right and left in favour of modem scientific and up-to-date methods. Great scientific laws and principles were becoming more generally understood, and with the understanding came the immediate application of them in a thousand varying directions, most of these being aimed at making the material life of man more easy and less strenuous. Following rapidly on the heels of the wonders of steam traction came the marvels of electricity, and at the present moment new methods of annihilating time and distance are presented to the world in quick succession. Modem life was developing with an extraordinary speed ; and all because of the appUcation of science to practical matters such as means of traction, propulsion, conununication, and travel. The tendency permeated into every branch of daily life except THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL. For a loug time it appeared to leave the religious side of man severely alone and utterly neglected. That part of his mind remained where it was^ and those whose business it was to look after it were content to continue on the same old lines, using the same antiquated and out-of-date methods and machinery, on minds which were saturated with the scientific method in every other department of life.' The result was inevitable. The minds became impatient, — ^to put it mildly. Many revolted openly, and far more in silence. Gradually and almost imperceptibly, but absolutely inevitably, the modem scientific mind realised that it was entirely out of touch with the religious methods of the denominations, which were precisely what they were fifty years ago.

It was long before it was realised what was responsible for the undoubted fact, that the Churches were losing their hold over the man in the street. It is not realised yet by those whose business it is to look after his spiritual interests. All sorts of excuses are made for the failure of the Churches to retain his support and interest. The present generation are accused of being wrapped up in the pursuit of pleasure or money, or other things still more objectionable, and are said to be indifferent to the things which pertain to their spiritual life. The fault is put on to them. It is not true. It is our firm conviction that the jrounger minds of to-day, those which have been nurtured in the atmosphere of universally applied science, are more seriously interested in ethical problems, problems of life, and thought, and conduct, and feeling, than were such minds at any other time. But when they seek inspiration and instruction from those whose position involves the responsibility of conveying this inspiration and instruction, they are met with a system which has lost all its power to attract and convince, because it has neglected to adapt itself to the changed mental attitude of the day. It still uses its antiquated machinery, and therefore succeeds only when it operates on minds which still work in the old grooves. The modem mind — ^the mind which has been developed as the result of the universality of modem scientific thought— it does not and cannot touch.

The result of this failure on the part of organised religious teaching to appreciate the fact that the raw material upon which it has to act has changed in type, is very curious. The old method was almost exclusively on the lines of an appeal to the emotional part of man, and particularly, perhaps, to the emotion of fear, as exemplified in the terrible pictures of the horrors of the endless torment in a future life, for those who rejected religious teaching. The appeal was to terror, and terror of the future Ufe, whatever the reason may be, is no longer an effective appeal. The reason for its loss of power is, probably, that it was applied in the form of a mere statement that such and such things would happen^ and mere state* ments no longer carry much weight in the absence of evidence. This is characteristic of the age. It is no longer sufficient for a man to baldly inform the world that he has been to the North Pole ; the world requires him to produce such evidence as will explain how it was possible for him to do so, and a certain number of facts which can be demonstrated to be true. The world has lost its interest in mere dogmatic statements.

Is the mistake of modem orthodoxy, then, the fact that it still appeals chiefly to man's feelings and emotions instead of to his reasoning and intellect ? By no means. The mistake is in assuming that the two methods are contradictory and incompatible, and that religious phenomena are beyond the pale of the laws which govern the rest of man's nature. Nothing could be more erroneous than to suppose that the results of Christianity could be obtained in the absence of the emotional faculty, and the successful religious teacher for all time must appeal to the feelings of his hearers, if he is to have any success. But the hearers themselves must first be made to understand — and this is an intellectual process — ^that feelings and emotions are governed by law, and that the results which follow from experiencing certain emotions and feelings are not matters of chance nor caprice, but inevitable and certain. In a word, it must be made clear that these results are intelligible, not mysterious and incomprehensible. This is where the failure has been.

j For some extraordinary reason religious teachers

/have insisted that the sphere in which they

; operate is beyond the ken of man, above the

' limitation of natural law, and only to be accepted

by an act of faith, not believed in as the residt of

a process of reasoning. Religious teachers have

'refused to apply their reason to their emotions,

: and hence have failed utterly to explain the effects

of these emotions. " Nothing can take the place

,of feeling, for without it the religious instinct

misses its supreme satisfaction," says Professor

Peake, and we agree that it is in feeling rather

than in thought, that man comes nearest to his

supreme ideal. But the modem mind requires

an explanation of how this comes about, and this

is precisely what the Churches have so far refused

♦to give. Hence their loss of influence over a type

jof mind which is the product of its environment.

It will therefore be seen that we are to-day confronted with a problem, namely, the problem of the greatest life and how to live it. It is a scientific problem largely of a biological kind, because it involves the life of man and the formation of all that we speak of as his ' character/ including in that term all that goes to making him what he is individually.

It is a problem which has presented itself to mankind in many varied guises at different times, but was probably never so diflBcult to answer as it is to-day, because of the change of attitude towards its elements which we have just been noting. It is the problem of man's greatest life, and how it maybe lived, and it therefore constantly forces itself upon the attention of the most serious thinkers. It is the problem of how to live the I life that most nearly attains the highest ideal which has been conceived by human intellect, irrespective of the source of that ideal ; and to-day is specially concerned with answering the question — how ? Not why, so much as how. That is the modem phase of the old problem; that is the changed attitude.

What is the highest ideal? The answer has varied, and will vary, with succeeding ages and current S3rstems of philosophy, but for our present purpose it matters not what is the absolute highest. It is sufficient that the mind of man can conceive or have presented to it a condition of existence which at that time and to that mind appears to be the highest possible, and the problem then immediately presents itself — How may this standard be reached either in the fulness of perfection or even approximately. Observe that the question now is not — ^Why should the standard be aimed at, but. How may it be attained ? By what means ; not for what reason. Both are interesting and important questions, but the one seems of importance to the mind of to-day rather than the other.

The ideal has been presented to the world in varied forms according to the time and the originators, but ever since mankind became

THE PROBLEM ii

thinking beings vdth a capacity to appreciate any given standard of right and throng, there has been some conception of an ideal life to be attained, for that age the greatest life. It matters not whether that ideal were put forward by a Confudns, a Mohammed, a Moses, or a Christ ; for ages men have had their attention directed to the greatest life, and the problem has been how to attain to it. We believe that the futm« will show the answer to be by means of a Scientific Christianity.

All the great ethical teachers of the world who have attempted to answer this problem for men, have formicated directions for the guidance of conduct whereby this ideal life might be lived, and as a rule have claimed that unswerving obedience to these rules would inevitably meet with the desired result. These rules have been handed down to posterity in the sacred writings of various religions and by tradition of disciples, and have met with implicit belief in the minds of many thousands of mankind. Such a result could hardly have occurred unless experience had proved that the various systems did more or less accomplish in the lives of men what they promised. By following them in so far as they were able, men did produce in themselves and their fellows such alterations of life and conduct as made them conspicuous among others of their generation, and not infrequently involved them in persecu* tioQ and martyrdom. In all ages of which we have any record there have been individuals who have lived approximately the greatest lives attainable by men living in theirparticular environment, and aiming at their ideal life. The problem which to-day men are asking in this connection is — By what means have they so lived ? Not Why, but How. Once more be it clearly understood, it is not a question of the absolute but the relative. Given the highest standard, there have been ideal lives. The nobler the standard the greater the Uves, but the same phenomenon. In other words, there has been in all these efforts with their consequent results, something which has been of universal occurrence and which, therefore, must be some- \ thing fundamental, scnne great general principle at work, producing a uniform kind of effect, differing only in degree. This points to the existence of a general Law ; and if such exists — as it must do — ^then this Law should be capable of being expressed in a simple and scientific manner, which should render it intelligible to educated minds which desire to imderstand as well as to believe.

At one period of the world's ethical history there seemed no special desire on the part of the majority to imderstand this process or law : that type of mind which yearns for explanations was not yet the ordinary t3rpe. It was then sufficient for men to be told that if they did this, that would follow. It was the day of teaching by authority, a day which has gone for ever for most men.

They beKeved and acted, or they disbelieved and neglected. Some, no doubt, more curious than others, desired more than a mere statement, but they were too few in number for their attitude to receive much attention or to be very obvious. There are still in existence systems of religion in which this ancient method is the only one adopted, but it is the method of the childhood of mankind, and it has now to be realised that a large portion of mankind — ^no longer in mental infancy — ^has ceased to find satisfaction in .blind acceptance. Growth demands something more. It is inevitable that it should be so.

It is, of course, not disputed for a moment that there is great virtue in obedience and discipline, even when given blindly, but such virtue is part of the equipment of childhood, and should be preparatory only to the obedience and discipline rendered by the adult because of reasoned thought. In the first place the child is, and must be, taught to obey, without there being any desire on its part to know the why and the how. That, however, is but a passing phase, and children very soon begin to ask why they should be expected to do certain things and not to do others. They may and do ask these questions before they can understand that they must be taught certain habits and actions, in the hope that these will become habitual long before any mental conception of their ethical value can be expected. But such a method of training cannot be persisted in indefinitely, without interfering with proper mental growth and development. As the brain of the child grows, an effort should be made to make the child understand that the authority hitherto used was based upon soihething more than the mere whim of the parent or teacher. If such an effort be not made, the child will soon resent the dogmatic and authoritative method adopted, and escape from its chains as soon as possible and on every opportunity. Where these previously sufficed, now they irritate.

So it is in other matters. A large portion of / mankind have advanced mentally beyond the : stage when blind obedience to command in ethical matters is satisfying ; and to continue that method of training one single day longer than is absolutely necessary is to stunt the mental development and ultimately to cause the atrophy of the very faculties upon which all high ethical progress depends. The time comes sooner or later, when the individual rebels against mental slavery no less than against bodily slavery, and the form that the revolt takes is a demand for an answer to the question Why ? Hitherto we have done this because we were told to do it. Now we want to know — ^Why should we do this ? Notice that the appeal must now be made to Conscience where formerly it was to Authority, Formerly the answer was, * Because it is written ' : now the answer is ' Because it is right.' This is a decided step in ethical progress, and for many people it suffices for a time, aad for some it is sufficient for ever. If a standard of right and wrong can be put before them in which they can believe, they are content to regulate their conduct by that standard as far as possible, because it is right, but not simply because they are compelled to do so.

Then comes the further stage, which is so characteristic of to-day, the stage in which men in course of time fail to find attraction or satisfaction even in the knowledge that this or that is the right and the wrong, no matter how convinced they may be as to the correctness of the standard.

The mind of man has evolved so rapidly that now the search is for not reasons merely, but explanations. Only in explanation can it find satisfaction. Faith alone is no longer sufficient, that is a condition of the child-mind, which has passed away. That is not to disparage faith nor the child-mind ; it is simply putting both in their relative positions. Men now are seeking to know not only whether certain lines of conduct and thought constitute the best Uves, but they desire further to know how it is that, if these lines be followed the best lives result. Not * why ' now, but 'how.' Again, the appeal is changed. It passed from that of authority to that of conscience ; it passes in turn from that of conscience to that of Law.

Hence, we believe, the failure — ^in so far as they are a failure — of present-day religious methods of appeal to the modem educated mind. There is

a new type of mind but the methods remain

i antiquated. They are practically the same as they

were in the mental infancy of the people, and the adult mind is naturally unsatisfied. No longer is the grown-up mind, in the full vigour of its mental acquirements, content to be told ' Believe, Believe, and all will be well.' It is not so much that it doubts the appeal, as it is that it wants to know how the fact of its believing can bring about the result prophesied, if indeed it can do so ; and until some sort of explanation is forthcoming a great many minds ignore the appeal and will do so in increasing numbers.

Some there are still, who remain in the stage of the child-mind — ^possibly theirs is the easier lot. But there are also many, and they daily become more, who have developed beyond that stage. They are not to be blamed for this, as some would have us think, who ought to realise the reason of the change. It is impossible to educate a mind and at the same time give it contentment, imless it be filled. So well do some systems of religion recognise this fundamental fact, that they take every precaution to prevent mental development on the part of their followers by ruthlessly crushing any attempt to probe into reasons, or to ask for explanations. They endeavour to keep their followers for ever in the stage of the child-mind, lest a full mental development on the part of the followers should demand answers to the

Why and the How ; answers which to be satisfactory would require an amount* of mental .energising on the part of the teachers which would possibly be beyond their powers. Systems which adopt this attitude of suppression of the mind must ultimately, of course, pass away. Man will not for ever be content with the child-treatment in his mental sphere, and indeed, his discontent is becoming very apparent every day. In all religious systems which permit of any individuality of thought this symptom of unrest is prominent. From a thousand pulpits comes the cry that modem education is rendering men less religious. It is not true. Men were never more reUgiously inclined than they are to-day, but they are demanding a presentation of religious truth which shall be a living one and not a fossil. The food supplied is indigestible and non-nutritious. Men are asking for meat, and at the best are offered milk. Being no longer mental babes they find they are half-starved on the diet proffered.

The plain truth is, that our systems of religious teaching have not kept pace with the march of human intellect in other spheres, and hence of necessity these systems and methods are losing their influence over many minds, and those of the best quality. And the pity of it is that this inability (or unwillingness) on the part of the teachers and exponents of religious truths to adapt their methods of thought and exposition to modem minds, is being used as an argument by the enemies

B of religious truth for the abolition of religion altogether. Truly they have their opportunity. The modem intellectual stomach may well reject with disgust the dogmas of an effete theology, which are still so frequently offered to it by many as the only food available for its growth and nutrition. It simply cannot assimilate it any longer ; the food no longer fulfils its function ; and nothing satisfying has yet been offered in its place.