We have now, I hope, laid a sufficiently
broad foundation of the relation between the Law and
the Word. The Law cannot be changed, and the
Word can. We have two factors, one variable, and
the other invariable; so that from this combination
any variety of resultants may be expected. The
Law cannot be altered, but it can be specialized, just
as iron can be made to float by the same law by which
it sinks. Now let us try to figure out in our
imagination an ideal of the sort of results we should
want to bring out from these two factors.
In the first place I think we should
like to be free from all worry and anxiety; for a
life of continual worry is not worth living. And
in the second we should like always to have something
to look forward to and feel an interest in; for a
life entirely devoid of all interest is also not worth
living. But, granted that these two conditions
be fulfilled, I think we should all be well pleased
to go on living ad infinitum. Now can
we conceive any combination of the Law and the Word
which would produce such results? that is the question
before us. The first step is to generalize our
principle as widely as possible, for the wider the
generalization, the larger becomes the scope for specialization.
The invariable factor we already know. It is
the Law, always creating in accordance with the Word
that sets it in motion, whether constructive or destructive;
so what we really have to consider is the sort of Word
(i.e. Thought or Desire) which will set the Law
working in the right direction. It must be a
Word of confidence in its own power; otherwise by
the hypothesis of the case it would be giving contradictory
directions to the Law, or to borrow a simile from what
we have learnt about waves in ether, it would be sending
out vibrations that would cancel one another and so
produce no effect. Then it must be a Word that
does not compromise itself by antagonizing the Law
of unity, and so producing disruptive forces instead
of constructive ones. And finally, we must be
quite sure that it really is the right Word, and that
we have been making no mistake about it. If these
conditions be fulfilled the logical result will be
entire freedom from anxiety. Similarly with regard
to maintaining a continued interest in life. We
must have a continued succession of ideals, whether
great or small, that will carry us on with something
always just ahead of us; and we must work the ideals
out, and not let them evaporate in dreams. If
these conditions be fulfilled we have before us a
life of never-ending interest and activity, and therefore
a life worth living. Where then are we to find
the Word which will produce these conditions:
perfect freedom from anxiety and continual, happy
interest? I do not think it is to be found in
any way but by identifying our own Word with the Word
which brings all creation into existence, and keeps
it always moving onward in that continuous forward
movement which we call Evolution. We must come
back to the old teaching, that the Macrocosm is reproduced
in the Microcosm, with the further perception that
this identity of principle can only be produced by
identity of cause. Law cannot be other than eternal
and self-demonstrating, just as 2 x 2 must eternally
= 4; but it remains only an abstract conception until
the Creative Word affords it a field of operation,
just as twice two is four remains only a mathematical
abstraction until there is something for you to count;
and accordingly, as we have already seen, all our
reasoning concerning the origin of Creation, whether
based on metaphysical or scientific grounds, brings
us to the conception of a Universal and Eternal Living
Spirit localizing itself in particular areas of cosmic
activity by the power of the Word. Then, if a
similar Creative Power is to be reproduced in ourselves,
it must be by the same method: the localizing
of the same Spirit in ourselves by the power of the
same “Word.” Then our Word, or Thought,
will no longer be that of separate personality, but
that of the Eternal Spirit finding a fresh centre
from which to specialize the working of the Law, and
so produce still further results than that of the First
or simply Cosmic and Generic Creation, according to
the two maxims that “Nature unaided fails,”
and that “Principle is not limited by Precedent.”
I want to make this sequence clear
to the student before proceeding further:
1. Localization of the Spirit
in specific areas of Creative Activity.
2. Cosmic or Generic Creation,
including ourselves as a race resulting from this,
and providing both the material and the instruments
for carrying the work further by specializing the
Original Creative Power through individual Thought,
just as in all cases of scientific discovery.
3. Then, since what is to be
specialized through our individual Thought is the
Word of the Originating Power itself, in order to do
this we must think in terms of the Originating Word,
on the general principle, that any power must always
exhibit itself in terms of the instrument through
which it works.
This, it appears to me, is a clear
logical sequence, just as a tree cannot make itself
into a box, unless there be first the idea of a box
which does not exist in the tree itself, and also the
tools with which to fashion the wood into a box; while
on the other hand there could never be any box unless
there be first a tree. Now it is just such a
sequence as this that is set before us in the Bible,
and I do not find it adequately set forth in any other
teaching, either philosophical or religious, with
which I am acquainted. Some of these systems contain
a great deal of truth, and are therefore helpful as
far as they go; but they do not go the whole way,
and for the most part stop short at the first or simply
Cosmic Creation; or, if they attempt to pass beyond
this, it is on the line of making unaided power of
the individual the sole means by which to do so, and
thus in fact always keeping us at the merely generic
level. Such a mode of Thought as this, fails to
meet the requirements of our conception of a happy
life as one entirely exempt from fear and anxiety.
In like manner also it fails to meet the first requirements
of the whole series, viz.: the Word should
be certain of itself; and if it be not certain of
itself we have no assurance that it may not eventually
disappoint our hopes. In short, this mode of thought
leaves us to bear the whole burden from which we want
to escape. So it is not good enough; we must
look for something better.
Now this something better I find in
the Promises contained in the Bible, and it
is this that to my mind distinguishes our own Scriptures
from the sacred books of all other nations, and from
all systems of philosophy. I do not at all ignore
the current objections to the possibility of Divine
Promises, but I think that on examination they will
be found to be superficial and resulting from want
of careful enquiry into the true nature of the Promises
themselves. How is it possible for the Laws of
the Universe to make exceptions? How can God
act by individual favouritism unless it be either through
sheer caprice, or by the individual managing to get
round Him in some way, either by supplying some need
which He cannot supply for Himself, in which case
God is of limited power, or else by flattering Him,
in which case He is the apotheosis of absurd vanity.
The two are really the same question put in different
ways the question of individual exceptions
to the general Law.
The answer is that there are no individual
exceptions to the general Law; but there are very
various degrees of realization of the Principle of
the Law, and the more a man works with the Principle
the more the Law will work for him; so that the finer
his perception of the Principle becomes, the more
he will appear to be an exception to the Law as commonly
recognized.
Edison and Marconi are not capriciously
favoured by the laws of Nature, but they know more
about them than most of us.
Now it is just the same with the Bible
Promises. They are Promises according to Law.
They are based upon the widest generalization and
hence lead to the highest specialization through the
combined action of the Law and the Word Jachin
and Boaz, the Two Pillars of the Universe.
These Promises comprise all sorts
of desirable things: health of body, peace of
mind, earthly prosperity, prolongation of life, and,
finally, even the conquest of death itself; but always
on one condition: perfect “Confidence in
the power of the All-Originating Spirit in response
to our reliance on the Word.” This is what
the Bible calls Faith; and it is perfectly logical
when we understand the principle of it, for every
Thought of doubt is, in effect, the utterance of a
Word which produces negative results by the very same
law by which the Word of Faith produces positive ones.
This is the only condition which the Bible imposes
for the fulfilment of its Promises, and this is because
it is inherent in the nature of the Law by which their
fulfilment is to be brought about.
A few texts will suffice as examples
of the Bible Promises, and no doubt most of my readers
are familiar with many others; but it would be worth
while to read the Bible through, marking all such texts,
and classifying them according to the sort of promises
they contain.
Read, for instance, Job xxii, 21,
etc. This is a most remarkable passage containing
among other things the promise of earthly wealth; or
again Job v, 19, etc., where we find promises
of protection in time of danger, power over material
nature, and prolonged life. While in Job xxxiii,
23, etc., there is promise of return to youth,
a promise which is repeated in Psalm ciii, 5.
Again in Isaiah lxi, 20, etc., there is the promise
of immensely extended physical life, death at the
age of one hundred being counted so premature as to
resemble that of an infant, and the normal standard
of age being compared to a tree which lives for centuries;
and the same passage also promises immediate answer
to prayers. The Psalms are full of such promises,
and they are scattered throughout the Bible.
Now there is an unfortunate tendency
among people who read their Bible with reverence,
to what they call “spiritualize” such passages
as these, which means that they do not believe them.
They say such things are impossible; and therefore
they must have some other meaning, and accordingly
they interpret the words metaphorically, as referring
to something to be experienced in another life, but
quite impossible in this one.
Of course there are spiritual equivalents
to these things, and the teaching of the Bible is,
that they are the outward correspondences of inward
spiritual states; but to “spiritualize”
them in the way I am speaking of, is nothing but unbelief
in the power of God to work on the plane of Nature.
How such readers square their opinion with the fact
that God has created Nature, I do not know. Even
in the animal world we find wonderful instances of
longevity. If an elephant be not overworked before
he is twenty, he is in full working power up to eighty,
and will then be capable of light work for another
twenty years, after which he may yet enjoy another
twenty years of quiet old age as the reward of his
labours, while crocodiles and tortoises have been known
to live for centuries. If then such things be
possible in the ordinary course of Nature in the animal
world, why need we doubt the specializing power of
the Word to produce far greater results in the case
of man? It is because we will not accept the
maxim, that “Principle is not limited by Precedent”
in regard to ourselves, though we see it demonstrated
by every new scientific discovery. We rely more
on the past experience of the race, than on the Creative
Power of God. We call Him Almighty, and then
say that in His Book He promises things which He is
not able to perform. But the fault is with ourselves.
We limit “the Holy ONE of Israel,” and
as a consequence get only so much as by our mental
attitude we are able to receive again the
old maxim that “Power can only work in terms
of the instrument it works through.” I do
not say that it is at all easy for us to completely
rid ourselves of negative race-thought ingrained into
us from childhood, and subtly playing upon that generic
impersonal self in us of which I have spoken, and which
readily responds to those thought-currents to which
we are habitually attuned. It is a matter of
individual growth. But the promises themselves
contain no inherent impossibility, and are logical
deductions from the principles of the Creative Law.
If the power of the Spirit over things
of the material plane be an impossibility, then by
what power did Jesus perform his miracles? Either
you must deny his miracles, or you must admit the power
of the Spirit to work on the material plane there
is no way out of the dilemma. Perhaps you may
say: “Oh, but He was God in person!”
Well, all the promises affirm that it is God who does
these things; so what it is possible for God to do
at one time, it is equally possible for Him to do
at all times. Or perhaps you hold other theological
views, and will say that Jesus was an exception to
the rest of the race; but, on the contrary, the whole
Bible sets Him forth as the Example an exception
certainly to men as we now know them, but the Example
of what we all have it in us to become otherwise
what use is He to us? But apart from all argument
on the subject we have his own words, telling us that
those who believe in Him, i.e., believe what
He said about Himself shall be able to
do works as great as His own, and even greater (John
xiv, 12). For these reasons it appears to me
that on the authority of the Bible itself, and also
on metaphysical and scientific grounds we are justified
in taking such promises as those I have quoted in a
perfectly literal sense.
Then there are promises of the power
that will attend our utterance of the Word. “Thou
shalt also decree a thing and it shall be established
unto thee” (Job xxii, 28). “All things
are possible unto you” (Mark ix, 23). “Whosoever
... shall believe that what he sayeth cometh to pass,
he shall have whatsover he sayeth” (Mark xi,
23), and so on.
Other passages again promise peace
of mind. “Thou wilt keep him in perfect
peace whose mind is staid on Thee, because he trusteth
in Thee” (Isaiah xxvi, 3). “Let him
take hold of my strength that he may make peace with
me” (Isaiah xxvii, 5). St. Paul speaks of
“The God of Peace” in many passages, e.g.,
Rom. xv, 33; 2 Cor. xiii, 11; 1 Thess. v, 23,
and Hebr. xiii, 20; and Jesus, in his final discourse
recorded in the fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth
chapters of St. John’s Gospel, lays peculiar
stress on the gift of Peace.
And lastly there are many passages
which promise the overcoming of death itself; as for
instance Job xix, 25-27; John viii, 51, and x, 28,
and xi, 25 and 26; Hebr. ii, 14 and 15; 1 Cor.
xv, 50-57; 2 Tim. i, 10; Rom. vi, 23 ("The gift of
God is eternal life in Jesus Christ, our Lord").
“God commanded the blessing,
even Life for evermore” (Ps. cxxxiii, 3).
Now I hope the reader will take the
trouble to look up the texts to which I have referred,
and not be lazy. I am sure he would do so if he
were promised a ten pound note or a fifty dollar bill
for his pains, and if these promises are not all bosh,
there is something worth a good deal more to be got
by studying them. Just run through the list:
health, wealth, peace of mind, safety, creative power,
and eternal life. You would be willing to pay
a good premium to an Insurance Office that could guarantee
you all these. Well, there is a Company that does
this without paying any premium, and its name is “God
and Co., Unlimited”; the only condition, is
that you yourself have to take the part of “Co.”
and it is not a sleeping partnership, but a wide-awake
one!
So I hope you will take the trouble
to look up the texts; but at the same time you must
remember that the reading of single texts is not sufficient.
If you take any isolated phrase you choose, without
reference to the rest of the Book, there is no nonsense
you cannot make out of the Bible. You would not
be allowed to do that sort of thing in a Court of
Law. When a document is produced in evidence,
the meaning of the words used in it are very carefully
construed, not only in reference to the particular
clause in which they occur, but also with reference
to the intention of the document as a whole, and to
the circumstances under which they were written.
The same word may mean very different things in different
connections; for instance I remember two reported
cases in one of which the word “Spanish”
meant a certain sort of leather, and in the other
a kind of material used in brewing; and in like manner
particular texts are to be interpreted in accordance
with the gist of the Bible as a whole.
This is just the mistake the Jews
made, of building up theories on particular texts,
and which Jesus corrected when he said: “Search
the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal
life, and these are they which testify of me”
(John v, 39), or, as the Revised Version puts it:
“Ye search the Scriptures because ye think that
in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which
bear witness of me,” which appears to be the
better rendering. The words “ye think”
is the key to the whole passage. He says in effect:
“You fancy that eternal life is to be found
in the book. It is not to be found in the book,
but in what the book tells you about, and here I am
as a living example of it.” It is just
the same with everything else. No book can do
more than tell you about a thing; it cannot produce
it. You may study the cookery book from morning
till night, but that will not give you your dinner.
What Jesus meant was, that we should
read the Scriptures in the same way we should read
any other book of practical instruction. First
think what it is all about; then look at the nature
of the general principles involved, and then see what
instruction the book gives you for their practical
application. Then go and do it. And remember
also a further difference between reading about a
thing and doing it. A book is for everybody,
and can therefore, only give general instruction; but
when you come to do the thing you will always find
it works with some personal modifications, not
departures from the general principles you have read
about, but specializations of them and in
this way you will learn much that is not to be got
out of books, even the best.
I remember many years ago, when I
was much younger, asking one of our leading water-colour
artists, how he would recommend me to study landscape
painting, and he said: “Practise continually
from Nature, and you will learn more than any one
can teach you; that is how I have learnt, myself.”
On the subject, then in question, he said just what
Jesus did: “Here I am as a practical example
of what I tell you.” And another thing
is, that the more you think principles out for yourself
and try to observe them in practice, the clearer the
meaning of your book will become to you. I have
a few excellent books on painting, but I had no idea
how excellent they were when I first got them; practical
experience has taught me to find much more in them
than I did at first, for now I understand better what
they are talking about. Well, that is the way
to read the Bible, neither despising it as worthless
tradition, nor treating the mere letter of it with
superstitious veneration; both extremes are to be
equally avoided. In fact the Bible tells us so
itself: “The letter killeth, but the Spirit
giveth life” (2 Cor. iii, 6); this, of
course, does not mean that the letter can be tampered
with, any more than a judge can alter the wording
of a document put in evidence; it must be interpreted
in the general sense of the document as a whole; and
when the letter is thus vivified by the Spirit, it
will be found fully to express it. But we require
to enter into the Spirit of it first.
Now it appears to me, that taken in
this way, the Bible is an exceedingly practical book,
and that is why I want the reader to get at some general
principles which he will find, mutatis mutandis,
equally applicable all round, whether to electricity,
or to life, and whatever may be the subject-matter,
it will always be found to resolve itself into a question
of the relation between Law and Personality. If
now we read the Bible Promises in the light of the
general principles we have considered in the earlier
pages, we shall find that they are all Promises according
to Law. They are statements of the results to
be obtained by a truer realization of the principles
of Law and Personality than we have hitherto apprehended.
We must always bear in mind that the
Law is set in motion by the Word. The Word does
not make the Law, but gives it something to
work upon, so that without the Word there could be
no manifestation of the Law, a truth embodied in the
maxim, that “Every Creation carries its own
mathematics along with it.” If the reader
remembers what I have said in the chapter of “The
Soul of the Subject,” he will see that the principle
involved, is that of the susceptibility of the Impersonal
to suggestions from the Personal. This follows
of course from the very Conception of Impersonality;
it is that which has no power of selection and volition,
and which is therefore without any power of taking
an initiative on its own account.
In a previous chapter I have pointed
out that the only possible conception of the inauguration
of a world-system, resolves itself into the recognition
of one original and universal Substantive Life, out
of which proceeds a corresponding Verb, or active
energy, reproducing in action what the Substantive
is in essence. On the other hand there must be
something for this active principle to work in; and
since there can be nothing anterior to the Universal
Life or Energy, both these factors must be potentially
contained in it. If, then, we represent this Eternal
Substantive Life by a circle with a dot in the centre,
we may represent these two principles as emerging
from it by placing two circles at equal distance below
it, one on either side, and placing the sign “+”
(plus) in one, and the sign “-” (minus)
in the other. This is how students of these subjects
usually map out the relation of the prima principia,
or first abstract principles. The sign “+”
(plus) indicates the Active principle, and the sign
“-” (minus) the Passive principle.
If the reader will draw a little diagram as described,
it will help to make what follows clearer.
Necessarily the initiative must be
taken by the Active principle; and the taking of initiative
implies selection and volition, that is to say, the
essential qualities of personality; and Passivity implies
the converse of all this, and therefore is Impersonality.
The two principles in no way conflict with one another,
but are polar opposites, like the positive and negative
plates of a battery, or the two ends of a magnet.
They are complementary to one another, and neither
can work without the other. A little consideration
will show that this is not a mere fancy, but a self-obvious
generalization, the contrary to which it is impossible
to conceive. It is simply the case of the box
which cannot come into existence without the activity
of the carpenter and the passivity of the wood.
From such considerations as this the
deep thinkers of old times posited the generating
of a world-system by the interaction of what they named
Animus Dei, the Active principle, and Anima
Mundi, or Soul of the Universe, the Passive principle the
one Personal, and the other Impersonal; and by the
hypothesis of the case the only mode of activity possible
to Anima Mundi is response to Animus
Dei. But the same impersonal passivity must
also make Anima Mundi receptive likewise
to lesser and more individualized modes of Personality,
and it becomes, so to say, fecundated by the ideas
thus impressed upon it. In every case “the
word is the seed.” We may picture this planting
of an idea or “word” in the Cosmic soul
as acting very much like the initial impulse that
starts a train of waves in ether, and these thought-waves
are reproduced in corresponding forms; or, to recur
to the simile of seed, the cosmic soul acts like the
soil and gives it nourishment. Looking at it
in this way the old exponents of these things regarded
the Active principle as Masculine, and the Passive
as Feminine, the one generating and the other nutritive,
corresponding to the words rouah and hoshech,
the expansion and compression principles in the Hebrew
text of the opening verses of Genesis.
If then we posit this impersonal Soul
of the Universe as the living principle dwelling in
the substance of the etheric Universal Medium it will
account for a good many things. If it be asked
why we should assume the presence of a living principle
in the Universal Substance the answer is in the maxim
“Quod ex Vivo Vivum,”
what proceeds from Life is living. Then as we
see by our diagram, Anima Mundi equally with
Animus Dei proceeds from the original Substantive
of Life, and therefore, on the principle of the above
maxim, that like produces like, Anima Mundi
must also be a living thing whose vehicle is the Universal
Substance.
We may picture then, the response
of the indwelling Soul of the Universal Medium to
our Thought, as starting corresponding vibrations in
the Substance of the Medium, just as our own thought,
acting through the vibratory system of our nerves,
causes our body to make the movement we intend.
But perhaps you will say: How can this be, seeing
that by the hypothesis the Soul of the Universe is
Impersonal, and therefore unintelligent? Well,
it is just this fact of having no thought of its own,
that enables us to impress our thought upon it and
cause it, so to say, to “take on” an intelligence
relatively to the subject of our thought, much in
the same way that the impersonal soul in the human
subject “takes on” or reflects the thought
of the hypnotist, and not infrequently develops it
to a far greater extent than the original thought
of the operator expressed. Such a hypothesis and
I think some such hypothesis is needed to account
for any creation at all throws light on
the modus operandi of the Bible Promises.
We plant the Word of the Promise in the womb of Anima
Mundi, and if we do not uproot it by using the
same power adversely, it is bound to come to fruition
in due course, by the same Law by which the world-systems
are formed; and if we are to believe that the Word
of the Promise is not our own word, but the Word of
God, then our Thought of it is imbued with a corresponding
power as we hand it over to Anima Mundi.
Thus the Promises fulfil themselves automatically,
in accordance with the principles of the relations
between Law and Personality, and they do so, not
in our own power, but by the Power of the Word
of God.
This, then, gives us at least an intelligible
working hypothesis of the rationale of the Bible Promises.
The measurement of their fulfilment is exactly proportional
to our belief in them, not from any unintelligible
cause, and still less from any unreasoning feat of
a capricious Deity, but by the working of an intelligible
Law. If any of my readers happens to be an electrician,
he will find an exact parallel in what is known as
Ohm’s Law. Such readers will be familiar
with the formula C = E/R, but for the benefit of those
to whom this formula may be unintelligible, I will
give a few words of explanation. C means the current
of electricity which is to be delivered for any work
that is to be done. E stands for the Electro-motive
force which generates the current; and R is the Resistance
offered to the current by the conductor, such as the
wires through which it flows. If there be no
resistance, the full amount of current generated would
be delivered. But without any conductor no current
could be delivered, and therefore there must be some
resistance, and so the full power of the Electro-motive
force can never be delivered by the Current.
The amount that will be delivered is the original
power of the Electro-motive force divided by the Resistance.
The Resistance therefore acts as a restricting force,
limiting the extent to which the power of the original
Electro-motive force shall be delivered at the point
where the work is to be done, but at the same time
no delivery at that point could be effected without
it; so the Resistance also has a necessary part to
play in the working of the circuit. Now if we
want to translate the formula C = E/R into terms of
spiritual force we may put it thus: E stands for
the limitless Potential of the Eternal Spirit; C stands
for the current flowing from it; and R stands for
the localizing quality of our thought. We cannot
entirely dispense with this localizing quality, for
our whole purpose is to transmute the unlimited,
undifferentiated power, which subsists in the Eternal
Substantive of Spirit, into a particular differentiated
mode of action, which therefore implies a corresponding
centralization. This is the proper function of
our thought. It is this compressing power which,
as I said above, the Hebrew renders by the word “hoshech”
in the opening verses of Genesis, and which is the
necessary complementary to the converse expanding
power or “rouah.” It takes
the co-operation of the two to produce any results.
Restricted, then, to its proper function
our R or condensing quality is an essential factor
in the work. But if it be allowed to take the
form of doubt or unbelief, then it renders the flow
of the current from the Spirit ineffective to the
extent to which the doubt is entertained; and if doubt
be allowed to degenerate into total unbelief and denial
of the Power of the Spirit, we thereby cancel the
originating force altogether. To put it in terms
of the electrical formula, we make R greater than E,
in which case no current can flow. We thus find
that the words “According to your faith be it
unto you” are actually the statement of a Mathematical
Law, having nothing vague about them. This may
be a somewhat original application of Ohm’s
Law, but the parallel is so exact, that I cannot help
thinking it will appeal to some of my readers who
may be conversant with Electrical Science. For
those who are not, a simpler simile may be, that you
cannot deliver a more powerful stream of water than
the bore of the pipe through which it flows will admit
of; or, to employ a legal truism, delivery on the
part of the donor must be met by acceptance on the
part of the donee before a deed of gift can become
operative; or, in still simpler language, “you
may take a horse to the water but you can’t
make him drink.”
We see, then, that there is a Law
of Faith, and that Faith is not a denial of the universal
reign of Law, but the perception of its widest generalization,
and therefore giving scope to its highest specialization.
The opposition between Faith and Law, of which St.
Paul so often speaks, is the opposition between this
broad view of the ultimate Principle of the Creative
Law and that narrower view of restriction by particular
laws, which prevents us from grasping the Law of Faith;
but that he does not deny the Principle of Law,
that is the relation between C and E, is clear from
his own statement in Rom. viii, where he says:
“The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus
sets me free from the law of Sin and Death;”
in other words: the Law of the Good sets us free
from the Law of Evil; and for the same reason St. James
says, that the perfect law is the law, of Liberty (Jas.
i, 25).
Of course if we suppose that faith
is something contrary to the law of the Universe we
at once import into our thought the negative quality
which entirely vitiates our action. We rightly
perceive that the laws of the Universe can never be
altered, and if our notion of Faith be, that it is
an attempt to work in contradiction to these laws,
the best definition we can give it is that given by
the little girl in the Sunday school, who said that
“Faith is trying to make yourself believe what
you know is not true.” The reason for such
a misconception is, that it entirely omits one of
the factors in the calculation. It considers,
only the Law, and gives no place to the Word in the
scheme of things. Yet we do not carry this misconception
into the sciences of chemistry and electricity.
We take the immutability of the Law as the basis of
these sciences, but we do not expect the immutable
Law to produce a photographic apparatus, or an electric
train, without the intervention of a reasoning and
selective power which specializes the fundamental
general Law into particular uses. We do not look
to the Law for those powers of reasoning and selection,
through which we make it work in all the highly complex
ways of our ordinary commercial applications of it we
know better than that. We look to Personality
for this. In our every-day pursuits we always
act on the maxim that “Nature unaided fails,”
and that the infinite possibilities stored up in the
Law, can only be brought to light by a power of reasoning
and selection working through the Law. This co-operation
of the Personal with the Impersonal is the Law of
the Law; and since the Law is unchangeable, this Law
of the Law must also be unchangeable, and must
therefore apply on all planes, and through all time the
Law, that without co-operation of the Law and the
Word nothing can be brought into existence, from a
solar system to a pin; while on the other hand there
is no limit to what can be got out of the Law by the
operation of the Word.
If the student will look at the Bible
Promises in the light of the general principles, he
will find that they are perfectly logical, whether
from the metaphysical or from the scientific standpoint,
and that their working is only from the same Law through
which all scientific developments are made. If
this be apprehended it will be clear that the Word
of Faith is not “trying to make ourselves believe
what we know is not true,” but, as St. Paul puts
it, it is “giving substance to things not yet
seen” (Heb. xi, 1, R.V.).