278 Mimicking of Morality. [LECT. strong against the weak. The so-called good man deserves no approval, and the bad man deserves no blame. Both are simply what their molecules make them. Here is another of Mr. Spencer's pupils more logical than his master. A German, F. v. Hellwald,1 insists that the struggle for existence and the right of the strong is the only basis for morality. There is neither freedom of soul nor absolute truth, no absolute morality. The word morality, he says, should be banished from all scientific books; he calls all efforts to help the weak, to raise men to an ideal manhood-" Humanitäts-heuchelei," humanity-hypocrisy. And he declares that advanced philosophy must come to this. But how would it work practically? Prof. Tyndall throws light on the subject too. He says he would thus address the robber and ravisher: "You offend, because you cannot help offending, to the public detriment. We punish you, because we cannot help punishing you for the public good; we entertain no malice against you, but simply with a view to our own safety and purification, we are détermined that you, and such as you, shall not enjoy liberty of evil action in our midst."2 Thus no one is to blame, but those who prefer decent lives are stronger and rule the weaker. But reverse the majority. Let the robbers and ravishers and murderers be in the majority. They will rule, and may say to honest men: "We have no malice or hatred against you, but with a view to our safety and comfort, we will abrogate all laws against what you have called crime, and we will punish you and such as you who are guilty of being honest." And they would be as moral as the other. That is the legitimate outcome of Mr. Spencer's data of ethics, in so far as they can be got from evolution-philosophy. But there are four curious chapters in his "Data of Ethics." 1Bowne's "Studies in Theism." 2 Address on "Science and Man" before the Birminghan and Midland Institute. VI.] Acts without Character. 279 The first labors to show that it is not best for man to be utterly selfish, egoistic; the second2 shows that it is equally a mistake to be entirely unselfish-altruistic-otherish, if you please. The third3 points out that these two tendencies seem to imply permanent antagonism. The fourth reconciles them and shows that selfishness and otherishness are mutually co-essential, which means after all that it is scientific to do as Christ teaches, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself"-only there is no love; you must act as if you loved. After sundry ill-natured and uncalled for flings at Christianity he says:-"There are some classed as antagonists to the current creed (Christianity) who may not think it absurd to believe that a rationalized version of its ethical principles will eventually be acted upon." Up at Uyeno there is an educational museum where two skeletons, one of a monkey and another of a man, are placed side by side to show their brotherhood. Some such arrangement seems to be in Mr. Spencer's moral museum. In one glass case is the skeleton of manhood morals as taught by the "current creed;" under this is a ticket, stating, "This is the skeleton of an extinct and troublesome animal." Beside it is another skeleton somewhat resembling the former in shape, and labeled, "This specimen will live and walk in some future aeon, and will do it better than the other ever did." But I have tarried all too long, although I have but just touched on the incongruities of this system, which forsooth is to replace Christianity among men and perfect the civilization which Christianity has produced. Only one word. I would like to see Mr. Spencer or some one try it on a savage nation for a time to see how it would work. It could not perhaps do them much harm, but would it produce any improvement? Really, in looking 1 Chap. XI., "Egoism versus Altruism," p. 187. 2 Chap. XII." Altruism versus Egoism," p. 201. 3 Chap. XIII. "Trial and Compromise." 4 Chap. XIV. "Conciliation," p. 242. 280 The true Data of Ethics. [LECT. over the whole story, one is tempted to believe that there is more truth than sarcasm in a certain saying of an eminent scientist: "I believe that the philosophers of every age are equally foolish, but that the common people gradually increase in wisdom. " Common sense rejects such false philosophy, and turns again to God in a struggle, not in vain, to Push through these dark philosophies, and live. " And what has Christianity to offer the world of struggling humanity in place of this impossible regulative skeleton of moral philosophy? Everything that human nature needs. Light for its hopeless gloom, purity for its emptiness, strength for its weakness, a history of benediction in place of its story of failure and loss. The true data of ethics must begin with the divine, must postulate God and recognize a living relation with him and his will, or heart religion, as the soul and life of all morality. Religion and ethics cannot be divorced and live a true life. Religion is the life of the soul, morality its practical outgoings and fruitage in proper actions and good deeds. Mr. Spencer says that "religious creeds make right and wrong to be simply divine enactments;" "moral truths have no other origin than the will of God," and therefore he seems to infer that they are mere external impositions. There is a latent fallacy in this use of the word "will," which will be avoided by remembering that God is not some limited and capricious master, but the Infinite Creator whose will finds expression in the laws of nature, as well as in providence and in grace. God's will is seen in the revolving of the planets, in the growing of vegetable life, in the instinctive movements of animals; these invariable laws of nature are the workings of a nature framed of God, laws under which man also comes. But besides these there are also mental 66 1" Social Pressure," by the author of "Friends in Council," quoted also in Supernatural in Nature." VI.] God's Will, True Order. 281 and spiritual laws, expressions of the nature of the mind and the immortal soul, and it is for us to obey these laws. There are also moral laws which are simple complements of man's moral nature, and God's will acts again in enforcing these laws that are true and necessary to the very nature of man. These moral laws are expressions of his own nature as well as of ours. He is with us when we obey, against us when we disobey. The stars in their courses through infinite space, and through the ages, follow the will of God according to laws of the siderial heavens ; the tiny blades of grass and the mightiest monarch of forest, the fluttering insect of a day and the greatest animal of earth, follow the will of God in obeying laws implanted within them, because they cannot do otherwise. All these move in harmony. But man's nature too is an expression of the divine will, and the true laws of mind and morals and spiritual life all come from Him. But it is for man to follow these laws or to refuse to do so. Disobeying these laws is sin or moral disorder; obeying them is righteousness or moral order. By a merciful arrangement of justice, sin brings sorrow which should lead to amendment; but if persisted in, it fixes the character in opposition to God, and ensures lasting separation from Him. Righteousness, by a similar arrangement of justice, brings the joyous satisfaction of being at one with the will of God, of being in one's proper place in the universe, in the place for which our nature was intended; and persisted in, righteousness becomes more and more consolidated in character, man realizes a greater nearness to the loving All-Father, and looks forward to an eternity of communion with him and with kindred spirits. The absolutely moral is God's will. That which constitutes man's sin is the opposition of the human will to the Creator's. All the disharmony of the world is simply an aberration from our true nature, or in other words opposition to God's law. The absolutely good is God's idea of character and life-God's holi 282 Following God's Order, True Morality. [LECT. ness. The highest good after which man can aim is a voluntary harmonizing with the divine mind, out of which spring spiritual beauty and rational morality-a morality which consists in a knowledge of the Creator's will, an entire acquiescence in that will and a joy in obeying actively. Here is no mere classification of goods and virtues, and balancing of pleasures and duties. But an entering into an experience of rational spiritual freedom, a joyous movement of a new moral life, the outworking in man of the moral image of God dwelling within him. In contrast with this how puerile appears the philosophical aim of life-"surplus of agreeable feelings "-pleasure; Eating gives the healthy man pleasure, and yet the momentary or more remote pleasure of eating does by no means exhaust the object of food. Men should eat to live, not live to eat. And in the same way a voluntary following of the will of God is the surest, quickest road to lasting pleasure. We have joy unspeakable in doing the will of God, but low is the motive of the man who does God's will merely for the joy it will bring himself. We should have pleasure in goodness, not be good for pleasure. But this doctrine of man's union with the will of God seems very abstract, and perhaps unattractive. This sublimest of human possibilities has, however, been taught to man by an object-lesson which the lowest can comprehend. Out of one of the least promising tribes of earth's sons there stepped forth an absolutely perfect man in whom the image of God was real. His life is the holiest inspiration of man, his words point the shortest way to perfection. His meat and drink was to do the will of God. His message, "thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, with all thy mind, with all thy strength." But more than this, the peerless man showed us God's estimate of man, God's love for man, God's will towards man, carrying along with this new knowledge a new impulse of |