mustbeallowedtobethegodforonekindofperson，agodofpeaceandheavenandhome，thegodforanother。Wemustfranklyrecognizethefactthatweliveinpartialsystems，andthatpartsarenotinterchangeableinthespirituallife。Ifwearepeevishandjealous，destructionoftheselfmustbeanelementofourreligion；whyneeditbeoneifwearegoodandsympatheticfromtheoutset？Ifwearesicksouls，werequireareligionofdeliverance；butwhythinksomuchofdeliverance，ifwearehealthy-minded？[331]Unquestionably，somemenhavethecompleterexperienceandthehighervocation，herejustasinthesocialworld；butforeachmantostayinhisownexperience，whate’eritbe，andforotherstotoleratehimthere，issurelybest。
[331]Fromthispointofview，thecontrastsbetweenthehealthyandthemorbidmind，andbetweentheonce-bornandthetwice-borntypes，ofwhichIspokeinearlierlecturesseepp。159-164，ceasetobetheradicalantagonismswhichmanythinkthem。Thetwice-bornlookdownupontherectilinearconsciousnessoflifeoftheonce-bornasbeing“meremorality。”andnotproperlyreligion。“Dr。Channing。”anorthodoxministerisreportedtohavesaid，“isexcludedfromthehighestformofreligiouslifebytheextraordinaryrectitudeofhischaracter。”Itisindeedtruethattheoutlookuponlifeofthetwice-born——holdingasitdoesmoreoftheelementofevilinsolution——isthewiderandcompleter。The“heroic“or“solemn“wayinwhichlifecomestothemisa“highersynthesis“intowhichhealthy-mindednessandmorbidnessbothenterandcombine。Evilisnotevaded，butsublatedinthehigherreligiouscheerofthesepersonsseepp。
47-52，354-357。Butthefinalconsciousnesswhicheachtypereachesofunionwiththedivinehasthesamepracticalsignificancefortheindividual；andindividualsmaywellbeallowedtogettoitbythechannelswhichliemostopentotheirseveraltemperaments。InthecaseswhichwerequotedinLectureIV，ofthemind-cureformofhealthy-mindedness，wefoundabundantexamplesofregenerativeprocess。Theseverityofthecrisisinthisprocessisamatterofdegree。Howlongoneshallcontinuetodrinktheconsciousnessofevil，andwhenoneshallbegintoshort-circuitandgetridofit，arealsomattersofamountanddegree，sothatinmanyinstancesitisquitearbitrarywhetherweclasstheindividualasaonce-bornoratwice-bornsubject。
But，youmaynowask，wouldnotthisone-sidednessbecuredifweshouldallespousethescienceofreligionsasourownreligion？
InansweringthisquestionImustopenagainthegeneralrelationsofthetheoretictotheactivelife。
Knowledgeaboutathingisnotthethingitself。YourememberwhatAl-GhazzalitoldusintheLectureonMysticism——thattounderstandthecausesofdrunkenness，asaphysicianunderstandsthem，isnottobedrunk。Asciencemightcometounderstandeverythingaboutthecausesandelementsofreligion，andmightevendecidewhichelementswerequalified，bytheirgeneralharmonywithotherbranchesofknowledge，tobeconsideredtrue；
andyetthebestmanatthissciencemightbethemanwhofoundithardesttobepersonallydevout。Toutsavoirc’esttoutpardonner。ThenameofRenanwoulddoubtlessoccurtomanypersonsasanexampleofthewayinwhichbreadthofknowledgemaymakeoneonlyadilettanteinpossibilities，andblunttheacutenessofone’slivingfaith。[332]IfreligionbeafunctionbywhicheitherGod’scauseorman’scauseistobereallyadvanced，thenhewholivesthelifeofit，howevernarrowly，isabetterservantthanhewhomerelyknowsaboutit，howevermuch。
Knowledgeaboutlifeisonething；effectiveoccupationofaplaceinlife，withitsdynamiccurrentspassingthroughyourbeing，isanother。
[332]Compare，e。g。，thequotationfromRenanonp。37，above。
Forthisreason，thescienceofreligionsmaynotbeanequivalentforlivingreligion；andifweturntotheinnerdifficultiesofsuchascience，weseethatapointcomeswhenshemustdropthepurelytheoreticattitude，andeitherletherknotsremainuncut，orhavethemcutbyactivefaith。Toseethis，supposethatwehaveourscienceofreligionsconstitutedasamatteroffact。SupposethatshehasassimilatedallthenecessaryhistoricalmaterialanddistilledoutofitasitsessencethesameconclusionswhichImyselfafewmomentsagopronounced。Supposethatsheagreesthatreligion，whereveritisanactivething，involvesabeliefinidealpresences，andabeliefthatinourprayerfulcommunionwiththem，[333]workisdone，andsomethingrealcomestopass。Shehasnowtoexerthercriticalactivity，andtodecidehowfar，inthelightofothersciencesandinthatofgeneralphilosophy，suchbeliefscanbeconsideredTRUE。
[333]“Prayerful“takeninthebroadersenseexplainedaboveonpp。453ff。
Dogmaticallytodecidethisisanimpossibletask。Notonlyaretheothersciencesandthephilosophystillfarfrombeingcompleted，butintheirpresentstatewefindthemfullofconflicts。Thesciencesofnatureknownothingofspiritualpresences，andonthewholeholdnopracticalcommercewhateverwiththeidealisticconceptionstowardswhichgeneralphilosophyinclines。Thescientist，so-called，is，duringhisscientifichoursatleast，somaterialisticthatonemaywellsaythatonthewholetheinfluenceofsciencegoesagainstthenotionthatreligionshouldberecognizedatall。Andthisantipathytoreligionfindsanechowithintheveryscienceofreligionsitself。Thecultivatorofthissciencehastobecomeacquaintedwithsomanygrovelingandhorriblesuperstitionsthatapresumptioneasilyarisesinhismindthatanybeliefthatisreligiousprobablyisfalse。Inthe“prayerfulcommunion“ofsavageswithsuchmumbo-jumbosofdeitiesastheyacknowledge，itishardforustoseewhatgenuinespiritualwork——eventhoughitwereworkrelativeonlytotheirdarksavageobligations——canpossiblybedone。
Theconsequenceisthattheconclusionsofthescienceofreligionsareaslikelytobeadverseastheyaretobefavorabletotheclaimthattheessenceofreligionistrue。Thereisanotionintheairaboutusthatreligionisprobablyonlyananachronism，acaseof“survival。”anatavisticrelapseintoamodeofthoughtwhichhumanityinitsmoreenlightenedexampleshasoutgrown；andthisnotionourreligiousanthropologistsatpresentdolittletocounteract。
ThisviewissowidespreadatthepresentdaythatImustconsideritwithsomeexplicitnessbeforeIpasstomyownconclusions。Letmecallitthe“Survivaltheory。”forbrevity’ssake。
Thepivotroundwhichthereligiouslife，aswehavetracedit，revolves，istheinterestoftheindividualinhisprivatepersonaldestiny。Religion，inshort，isamonumentalchapterinthehistoryofhumanegotism。Thegodsbelievedin——whetherbycrudesavagesorbymendisciplinedintellectually——agreewitheachotherinrecognizingpersonalcalls。Religiousthoughtiscarriedonintermsofpersonality，thisbeing，intheworldofreligion，theonefundamentalfact。To-day，quiteasmuchasatanypreviousage，thereligiousindividualtellsyouthatthedivinemeetshimonthebasisofhispersonalconcerns。
Science，ontheotherhand，hasendedbyutterlyrepudiatingthepersonalpointofview。Shecataloguesherelementsandrecordsherlawsindifferentastowhatpurposemaybeshownforthbythem，andconstructshertheoriesquitecarelessoftheirbearingonhumananxietiesandfates。Thoughthescientistmayindividuallynourishareligion，andbeatheistinhisirresponsiblehours，thedaysareoverwhenitcouldbesaidthatforScienceherselftheheavensdeclarethegloryofGodandthefirmamentshowethhishandiwork。Oursolarsystem，withitsharmonies，isseennowasbutonepassingcaseofacertainsortofmovingequilibriumintheheavens，realizedbyalocalaccidentinanappallingwildernessofworldswherenolifecanexist。Inaspanoftimewhichasacosmicintervalwillcountbutasanhour，itwillhaveceasedtobe。TheDarwiniannotionofchanceproduction，andsubsequentdestruction，speedyordeferred，appliestothelargestaswellastothesmallestfacts。Itisimpossible，inthepresenttemperofthescientificimagination，tofindinthedriftingsofthecosmicatoms，whethertheyworkontheuniversalorontheparticularscale，anythingbutakindofaimlessweather，doingandundoing，achievingnoproperhistory，andleavingnoresult。Naturehasnoonedistinguishableultimatetendencywithwhichitispossibletofeelasympathy。Inthevastrhythmofherprocesses，asthescientificmindnowfollowsthem，sheappearstocancelherself。
Thebooksofnaturaltheologywhichsatisfiedtheintellectsofourgrandfathersseemtousquitegrotesque，[334]representing，astheydid，aGodwhoconformedthelargestthingsofnaturetothepaltriestofourprivatewants。TheGodwhomsciencerecognizesmustbeaGodofuniversallawsexclusively，aGodwhodoesawholesale，notaretailbusiness。Hecannotaccommodatehisprocessestotheconvenienceofindividuals。Thebubblesonthefoamwhichcoatsastormyseaarefloatingepisodes，madeandunmadebytheforcesofthewindandwater。Ourprivateselvesarelikethosebubbles——epiphenomena，asClifford，Ibelieve，ingeniouslycalledthem；theirdestiniesweighnothinganddeterminenothingintheworld’sirremediablecurrentsofevents。
[334]Howwasiteverconceivable，weask，thatamanlikeChristianWolff，inwhosedry-as-dustheadallthelearningoftheearlyeighteenthcenturywasconcentrated，shouldhavepreservedsuchababy-likefaithinthepersonalandhumancharacterofNatureastoexpoundheroperationsashedidinhisworkontheusesofnaturalthings？This，forexample，istheaccounthegivesofthesunanditsutility：——
“WeseethatGodhascreatedthesuntokeepthechangeableconditionsontheearthinsuchanorderthatlivingcreatures，menandbeasts，mayinhabititssurface。Sincemenarethemostreasonableofcreatures，andabletoinferGod’sinvisiblebeingfromthecontemplationoftheworld，thesuninsofarforthcontributestotheprimarypurposeofcreation：withoutittheraceofmancouldnotbepreservedorcontinued……Thesunmakesdaylight，notonlyonourearth，butalsoontheotherplanets；anddaylightisoftheutmostutilitytous，forbyitsmeanswecancommodiouslycarryonthoseoccupationswhichinthenight-timewouldeitherbequiteimpossible。Oratanyrateimpossiblewithoutourgoingtotheexpenseofartificiallight。
Thebeastsofthefieldcanfindfoodbydaywhichtheywouldnotbeabletofindatnight。Moreoverweoweittothesunlightthatweareabletoseeeverythingthatisontheearth’ssurface，notonlynearby，butalsoatadistance，andtorecognizebothnearandfarthingsaccordingtotheirspecies，whichagainisofmanifoldusetousnotonlyinthebusinessnecessarytohumanlife，andwhenwearetraveling，butalsoforthescientificknowledgeofNature，whichknowledgeforthemostpartdependsonobservationsmadewiththehelpofsight，andwithoutthesunshine，wouldhavebeenimpossible。Ifanyonewouldrightlyimpressonhismindthegreatadvantageswhichhederivesfromthesun，lethimimaginehimselflivingthroughonlyonemonth，andseehowitwouldbewithallhisundertakings，ifitwerenotdaybutnight。Hewouldthenbesufficientlyconvincedoutofhisownexperience，especiallyifhehadmuchworktocarryoninthestreetorinthefields……Fromthesunwelearntorecognizewhenitismidday，andbyknowingthispointoftimeexactly，wecansetourclocksright，onwhichaccountastronomyowesmuchtothesun……Byhelpofthesunonecanfindthemeridian……Butthemeridianisthebasisofoursun-dials，andgenerallyspeaking，weshouldhavenosun-dialsifwehadnosun。”VernunftigeGedankenvondenAbsichterdernaturlichenDinge，1782。pp。74-84。
OrreadtheaccountofGod’sbeneficenceintheinstitutionof“thegreatvarietythroughouttheworldofmen’sfaces，voices，andhand-writing。”giveninDerham’sPhysico-theology，abookthathadmuchvogueintheeighteenthcentury。“HadMan’sbody。”
saysDr。Derham，“beenmadeaccordingtoanyoftheAtheisticalSchemes，oranyotherMethodthanthatoftheinfiniteLordoftheWorld，thiswiseVarietywouldneverhavebeen：butMen’sFaceswouldhavebeencastinthesame，ornotaverydifferentMould，theirOrgansofSpeechwouldhavesoundedthesameornotsogreataVarietyofNotes，andthesameStructureofMusclesandNerveswouldhavegiventheHandthesameDirectioninWriting。AndinthisCasewhatConfusion，whatDisturbance，whatMischiefswouldtheworldeternallyhavelainunder！NoSecuritycouldhavebeentoourpersons；noCertainty，noEnjoymentofourPossessions；noJusticebetweenManandMan，noDistinctionbetweenGoodandBad，betweenFriendsandFoes，betweenFatherandChild，HusbandandWife，MaleorFemale；butallwouldhavebeenturnedtopsy-turvy，bybeingexposedtotheMaliceoftheEnviousandill-Natured，totheFraudandViolenceofKnavesandRobbers，totheForgeriesofthecraftyCheat，totheLustsoftheEffeminateandDebauched，andwhatnot！OurCourtsofJusticecanabundantlytestifythedireEffectsofMistakingMen’sFaces，ofcounterfeitingtheirHands，andforgingWritings。
ButnowastheinfinitelywiseCreatorandRulerhathorderedtheMatter，everyman’sFacecandistinguishhimintheLight，andhisVoiceintheDark，hisHand-writingcanspeakforhimthoughabsent，andbehisWitness，andsecurehisContractsinfutureGenerations。AmanifestaswellasadmirableIndicationofthedivineSuperintendenceandManagement。”
AGodsocarefulastomakeprovisionevenfortheunmistakablesigningofbankchecksanddeedswasadeitytrulyaftertheheartofeighteenthcenturyAnglicanism。