ctual living
organs of God himself, for the expressions quoted above--and many others
could be given--come to no less than this. It follows that since any man
could unite himself to "the flesh and bones" of God by becoming a
Christian, Paul had a perception of the unity at any rate of human life;
and what Paul admitted I am persuaded the Church of Rome will not deny.
Granted that Paul's notion of the unity of all mankind in one spirit
animating, or potentially animating the whole was mystical, I submit
that the main difference between him and the Evolutionist is that the
first uses certain expressions more or less prophetically, and without
perhaps a full perception of their import; while the second uses the
same expressions literally, and with the ordinary signification attached
to the words that compose them. It is not so much that we do not hold
what Paul held, but that we hold it with the greater definiteness and
comprehension which modern discovery has rendered possible. We not only
accept his words, but we extend them, and not only accept them as
articles of faith to be taken on the word of others, but as so
profoundly entering into our views of the world around us that that
world loses the greater part of its significance if we may not take such
sayings as that "we are God's flesh and his bones" as meaning neither
more nor less than what appears upon the face of them. We believe that
what we call our life is part of the universal life of the Deity--which
is literally and truly made manifest to us in flesh that can be seen and
handled--ever changing, but the same yesterday, and to-day, and for
ever.
So much for the closeness with which we have come together on matters of
fact, and now for the _rapprochement_ between us in respect of how much
conformity is required for the sake of avoiding schism. We find
ourselves driven through considerations of great obviousness and
simplicity to the conclusion that a man both may and should keep no
small part of his opinions to himself, if they are too widely different
from those of other people for the sake of union and the strength gained
by concerted action; and we also find the Pope declaring of one of the
brightest saints and luminaries of the Church that we need not follow
him when it is plainly impossible for us to do so. Is it so very much to
hope that ere many years are over the approximation will become closer
still?
I have sometimes imagined that the doctrine o
|