ess to point out that one of the most
recognizable characteristics of life is its unrecognizableness, and that
the very token of its spiritual nature lies in its being beyond the
grossness of our eyes?

We do not pretend that Science can define this Life to be Christ. It has
no definition to give even of its own life, much less of this. But there
are converging lines which point, at least, in the direction that it is
Christ. There was One whom history acknowledges to have been the Truth.
One of His claims was this, "I am the Life." According to the doctrine
of Biogenesis, life can only come from life. It was His additional claim
that His function in the world was to give men Life. "I am come that ye
might have Life, and that ye might have it more abundantly." This could
not refer to the natural life, for men had that already. He that hath
the Son hath another Life. "Know ye not your own selves how that Jesus
Christ is in you."

Again, there are men whose characters assume a strange resemblance to
Him who was the Life. When we see the bird-character appear in an
organism we assume that the Bird-Life has been there at work. And when
we behold Conformity to Type in a Christian, and know moreover that the
type-organization can be produced by the type-life alone does this not
lend support to the hypothesis that the Type-Life also has been here at
work? If every effect demands a cause, what other cause is there for the
Christian? When we have a cause, and an adequate cause, and no other
adequate cause; when we have the express statement of that Cause that he
is that cause, what more is possible? Let not Science, knowing nothing
of its own life, go further than to say it knows nothing of this Life.
We shall not dissent from its silence. But till it tells us what it is,
we wait for evidence that it is not this.

Third: The Process.

It is impossible to enter at length into any details of the great
miracle by which this protoplasm is to be conformed to the Image of the
Son. We enter that province now only so far as this Law of Conformity
compels us. Nor is it so much the nature of the process we have to
consider as its general direction and results. We are dealing with a
question of morphology rather than of physiology.

It must occur to one on reaching this point, that a new element here
comes in which compels us, for the moment, to part company with zoology.
That element is the conscious power of choice. The animal in fol