Part 6 (2/2)
Mr. Newman, in his later days, we understand, had modified the bitterness of his opposition to historical Christianity and was ready to avow himself as a disciple of Christ.
Miss Frances Power Cobbe was another devout spirit who, with less violence but equal decisiveness, accepted Theism as apart from Christianity. In her case, even more visibly than in Mr. Newman's, it was not Christianity which she rejected, but sundry distortions of it with which it had in her mind become {150} identified. She wrote not a few articles so permeated with the Christian spirit and imbued with the Christian hope that the most ardent believer in Christ could read them with entire approval and own himself their debtor. She took an active part in many philanthropic movements, and she was an earnest and eloquent advocate of faith in the Divine Ordering of the world and in human immortality.
'Theism,' she said, 'is not Christianity _minus_ Christ, nor Judaism _minus_ the miraculous legation of Moses, nor any other creed whatsoever merely stripped of its supernatural element. It is before all things the positive affirmation of the Absolute Goodness of G.o.d: and if it be in antagonism to other creeds, it is princ.i.p.ally because of, and in proportion to, their failure to a.s.sert that Goodness in its infinite and all-embracing completeness.'[9] 'G.o.d is over us, and heaven {151} is waiting for us all the same, even though all the men of science in Europe unite to tell us there is only matter in the universe and only corruption in the grave. Atheism may prevail for a night, but faith cometh in the morning. Theism is ”bound to win” at last: not necessarily that special type of Theism which our poor thoughts in this generation have striven to define: but that great fundamental faith, the needful substruction of every other possible religious faith, the faith in a Righteous and Loving G.o.d, and in a Life of man beyond the tomb.'[10]
'All the monitions of conscience, all the guidance and rebukes and consolations of the Divine Spirit, all the holy words of the living, and all the sacred books of the dead, these are our primary Evidences of Religion. In a word, the first article of our creed is ”I BELIEVE IN G.o.d THE HOLY GHOST.” After this fundamental dogma, we accept {152} with joy and comfort the faith in the Creator and Orderer of the physical universe, and believe in G.o.d THE FATHER ALMIGHTY, MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH. And lastly we rejoice in the knowledge that (in no mystic Athanasian sense, but in simple fact) ”_these two are One_.”
The G.o.d of Love and Justice Who speaks in conscience, and Whom our inmost hearts adore, is the same G.o.d Who rolls the suns and guides the issues of life and death.'[11]
In an able paper, _A Faithless World_, in which Miss Cobbe combated the a.s.sertion of Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, that the disappearance of belief in G.o.d and Immortality would be unattended with any serious consequences to the material, intellectual, or moral well-being of mankind, she forcibly said, 'I confess at starting on this inquiry, that the problem, ”Is religion of use, or can we do as well without it?” seems to me {153} almost as grotesque as the old story of the woman who said that we owe vast obligations to the moon, which affords us light on dark nights, whereas we are under no such debt to the sun, who only s.h.i.+nes by day, _when there is always light_. Religion has been to us so diffused a light that it is quite possible to forget how we came by the general illumination, save when now and then it has blazed out with special brightness.' The comment is eminently just, but does it not apply with equal force to Miss Cobbe herself? The Theism which she professed was the direct outcome of Christianity, could never have existed but for Christianity, was, in all its best features, simply Christianity under a different name.
That Theism, as a separate organisation, gives little evidence of conquering the world is shown by the fact that, after many years, it boasts of only one congregation, that of the Theistic Church, Swallow Street, Piccadilly, {154} of which the Rev. Charles Voysey is minister.
Mr. Voysey was at one time vicar of a parish in Yorks.h.i.+re, where he issued, under the t.i.tle of _The Sling and the Stone_, sermons attacking the commonly accepted doctrines of the Church of England, and was in consequence deprived of his living. He is distinctly anti-Christian in his teaching; strongly prejudiced against anything that bears the Christian name: criticising the sayings and doings of our Lord in a fas.h.i.+on which indicates either the most astonis.h.i.+ng misconception or the most melancholy perversion. But his sincerity and fervour on behalf of Theism are unmistakable. He describes it as _Religion for all mankind, based on facts which are never in Dispute_. The book which is called by that t.i.tle is written for the help and comfort of all his fellowmen, 'chiefly for those who have doubted and discarded the Christian Religion, and in consequence have become Agnostics or {155} Pessimists.' It is prefaced by a dedication, which is also a touching confession of personal faith: 'In all humility I dedicate this book to my G.o.d Who made me and all mankind, Who loves us all alike with an everlasting love, Who of His very faithfulness causeth us to be troubled, Who punishes us justly for every sin, not in anger or vengeance, but only to cleanse, to heal, and to bless, in Whose Everlasting Arms we lie now and to all eternity.'[12]
Mr. Voysey has compiled a Prayer Book for the use of his congregation.
The ordinary service is practically the morning or evening service of the Book of Common Prayer, with all references to our Lord carefully eliminated. The hymn _Jesus, Lover of my Soul_ is changed to _Father, Refuge of my Soul_; and the hymn
Just as I am without one plea, But that Thy blood was shed for me, And that Thou bidst me come to Thee, O Lamb of G.o.d, I come,
{156} is rendered:
Just as I am without one plea, But that Thy lore is seeking me, And that Thou bidst me come to Thee, O loving G.o.d, I come.
The service respecting our duty, and the service of supplication have merits of their own, but, except for the wanton omission of the Name which is above every name, there is nothing in them which does not bear a Christian impress. 'Christianity _minus_ Christ' would seem to be no unfair definition of their standpoint: and without Christ they could not have been what they are. The Father Who is set forth as the Object of wors.h.i.+p and of trust is the Father Whom Christ declared, the Father Who, but for the manifestation of Christ, would never have been known.
Far be it from us to deny that the Father has been found by those who have sought Him beyond the limits of the Church: this only we affirm that those by whom He {157} has been found, have, consciously or unconsciously, drawn near to Him by the way of Christ. Nothing of value in modern Theism is incompatible with Christianity: nothing of value which would not be strengthened by faith in Him Who said, 'He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.'
IV
The strange objection to faith in Christ is sometimes made that it interferes with faith in the Father. The notion of mediation is regarded as derogatory alike to G.o.d and to man. There is no need for any one to come between: no need for G.o.d to depute another to bear witness of Him: no need for us to depute Another to secure His favour, as from all eternity He is Love. The a.s.sumption, the groundless a.s.sumption, underlying this conception is that the Mediator is a barrier between man and G.o.d, a hindrance not a help to fellows.h.i.+p with the Divine: that one {158} goes to the Mediator because access to G.o.d is debarred. Whatever may occasionally have been the unguarded statements of representatives of Christianity, it is surely plain that no such doctrine is taught, that the very opposite of such doctrine is taught, in the New Testament. 'We do not,' says M. Sabatier, 'address ourselves to Jesus by way of dispensing ourselves from going to the Father. Far from this, we go to Christ and abide in Him, precisely that we may find the Father. We abide in Him that His filial consciousness may become our own; that the Spirit may become our spirit, and that G.o.d may dwell immediately in us as He dwells in Him.
Nothing in all this carries us outside of the religion of the Spirit: on the contrary, it is its seal and confirmation.'[13]
The whole object of the work of Christ, as proclaimed by Himself, or as interpreted {159} by His Apostles, was to show the Father, to bring men to the Father. 'Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of Myself: but the Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works.' He 'came and preached peace to you which were afar off and to them that were nigh.
For through Him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.' To argue that to come to Christ is a subst.i.tute for coming to G.o.d, is an inducement to halt upon the way, is an absolute travesty and perversion. To refuse to see the glory of G.o.d in the Face of Jesus Christ is not to bring G.o.d near: it is to remove Him further from our vision. That G.o.d should come to us, that we should go to G.o.d, through a mediator, is only in accordance with a universal law. 'Why,' says one, who might be expected from his theological training to speak otherwise, 'Why, _all_ knowledge is ”mediated” even of {160} the simplest objects, even of the most obvious facts: there is no such thing in the world as immediate knowledge, and shall we demur when we are told that the knowledge of G.o.d the Father also must pa.s.s, in order to reach us at its best and purest, through the medium of ”that Son of G.o.d and Son of Man in Whom was the fulness of the prophetic spirit and the filial life?” ... Of this at least I feel convinced, that where faith in the Father has grown blurred and vague in our days, and finally flickered out, the cause must in many instances be sought--I will not say in the wilful rejection, but--in the careless letting go of the message and Personality of the Son.'[14] So far from the thought of the Father being ignored or set aside by the thought of Christ, we may rather say with S. John, 'Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also.' 'He {161} that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.'
The homage that we render Thee Is still our Father's own; Nor jealous claim or rivalry Divides the Cross and Throne.[15]
V
The notion that Theism as contrasted with Christianity is a mark of progress and of spirituality is a pure imagination. 'More spiritual it may be than the traditional Christianity which consists in rigid and stereotyped forms of practice, of ceremonial, of observance, of dogma: but not more spiritual than the teaching of Christ Himself, the end and completion of Whose work was to bring men to the Father, to teach them that G.o.d is a Spirit, and to send the Spirit of the Father into the hearts of the disciples. It would be a strange perversity if men should reject Christ in the name of spiritual {162} religion when it is to Christ, and to Him alone, that they owe the conception of what spiritual religion is.'[16] To preach the doctrines of Theism without reference to Christ is to deprive them of their most sublime ill.u.s.tration, their most inspiring force, and their most convincing proof.
It is as Christ is known that G.o.d is believed in. The attempt to create enthusiasm for G.o.d while banis.h.i.+ng the Gospel of Christ meets with astonis.h.i.+ngly small response. The 'Religion for all Mankind'
makes but little progress, is, in spite of the labours of five-and-thirty years, confined, as we have seen, almost to a solitary moderately sized congregation. And whether or not the 'facts' on which the religion is based 'are never in dispute,' the religion itself is often-times disputed very keenly. Modern a.s.saults upon religious faith are, as a rule, directed quite as much against Theism as {163} against Christianity.[17] It is the Love, or even the existence, of the Living G.o.d, it is human responsibility, it is life beyond the grave, that are called in question as frequently as the Resurrection of Christ. The a.s.surance that G.o.d at sundry times and in divers manners has spoken by prophets renders it not more but less improbable that He should speak by a Son: the a.s.surance that there is life beyond the grave for all renders it not more but less improbable that Jesus rose from the dead.
Conversely those who believe in Jesus believe with a double intensity in Him Whom He revealed. 'Ye believe in G.o.d,' said Christ, 'believe also in Me.' For many of us now, it is because we believe in Christ that we believe also in G.o.d. The Almighty and Eternal is beyond our ken: the grace and truth of Jesus Christ come home to our hearts. The Word that was in the beginning with G.o.d and was G.o.d, {164} is wrapt in impenetrable mystery: the Word made Flesh can be seen and handled: has
wrought With human hands the Creed of Creeds In loveliness of perfect deeds, More strong than all poetic thought.[18]
And however it may be in a few exceptional cases, where people nominally renouncing Christ desperately cleave to a fragment of the faith of their childhood, the fact remains that, where He ceases to be acknowledged, faith in the Father Whom He manifested tends, gradually or speedily, to vanish.
<script>