lecture20- 第1部分

Lecture　XX







CONCLUSIONS







The　material　of　our　study　of　human　nature　is　now　spread　before



us；　and　in　this　parting　hour；　set　free　from　the　duty　of



description；　we　can　draw　our　theoretical　and　practical



conclusions。　　In　my　first　lecture；　defending　the　empirical



method；　I　foretold　that　whatever　conclusions　we　might　come　to



could　be　reached　by　spiritual　judgments　only；　appreciations　of



the　significance　for　life　of　religion；　taken　〃on　the　whole。〃　　　



Our　conclusions　cannot　be　as　sharp　as　dogmatic　conclusions　would



be；　but　I　will　formulate　them；　when　the　time　comes；　as　sharply　as



I　can。







Summing　up　in　the　broadest　possible　way　the　characteristics　of



the　religious　life；　as　we　have　found　them；　it　includes　the



following　beliefs：







1。　　That　the　visible　world　is　part　of　a　more　spiritual　universe



from　which　it　draws　its　chief　significance；







2。　　That　union　or　harmonious　relation　with　that　higher　universe



is　our　true　end；







3。　　That　prayer　or　inner　communion　with　the　spirit　thereof　be



that　spirit　〃God〃　or　〃law〃is　a　process　wherein　work　is　really



done；　and　spiritual　energy　flows　in　and　produces　effects；



psychological　or　material；　within　the　phenomenal　world。







Religion　includes　also　the　following　psychological



characteristics：







4。　　A　new　zest　which　adds　itself　like　a　gift　to　life；　and　takes



the　form　either　of　lyrical　enchantment　or　of　appeal　to



earnestness　and　heroism。







5。　　An　assurance　of　safety　and　a　temper　of　peace；　and；　in



relation　to　others；　a　preponderance　of　loving　affections。







In　illustrating　these　characteristics　by　documents；　we　have　been



literally　bathed　in　sentiment。　　In　re…reading　my　manuscript；　I　am



almost　appalled　at　the　amount　of　emotionality　which　I　find　in　it。







After　so　much　of　this；　we　can　afford　to　be　dryer　and　less



sympathetic　in　the　rest　of　the　work　that　lies　before　us。







The　sentimentality　of　many　of　my　documents　is　a　consequence　of



the　fact　that　I　sought　them　among　the　extravagances　of　the



subject。　　If　any　of　you　are　enemies　of　what　our　ancestors　used　to



brand　as　enthusiasm；　and　are；　nevertheless；　still　listening　to　me



now；　you　have　probably　felt　my　selection　to　have　been　sometimes



almost　perverse；　and　have　wished　I　might　have　stuck　to　soberer



examples。　　I　reply　that　I　took　these　extremer　examples　as



yielding　the　profounder　information。　　To　learn　the　secrets　of　any



science；　we　go　to　expert　specialists；　even　though　they　may　be



eccentric　persons；　and　not　to　commonplace　pupils。　　We　combine



what　they　tell　us　with　the　rest　of　our　wisdom；　and　form　our　final



judgment　independently。　　Even　so　with　religion。　　We　who　have



pursued　such　radical　expressions　of　it　may　now　be　sure　that　we



know　its　secrets　as　authentically　as　anyone　can　know　them　who



learns　them　from　another；　and　we　have　next　to　answer；　each　of　us



for　himself；　the　practical　question：　　what　are　the　dangers　in



this　element　of　life？　　and　in　what　proportion　may　it　need　to　be



restrained　by　other　elements；　to　give　the　proper　balance？







But　this　question　suggests　another　one　which　I　will　answer



immediately　and　get　it　out　of　the　way；　for　it　has　more　than　once



already　vexed　us。＇330＇　Ought　it　to　be　assumed　that　in　all　men　the



mixture　of　religion　with　other　elements　should　be　identical？　



Ought　it；　indeed；　to　be　assumed　that　the　lives　of　all　men　should



show　identical　religious　elements？　　In　other　words；　is　the



existence　of　so　many　religious　types　and　sects　and　creeds



regrettable？







＇330＇　For　example；　on　pages　135；　160；　326　above。















To　these　questions　I　answer　〃No〃　emphatically。　　And　my　reason　is



that　I　do　not　see　how　it　is　possible　that　creatures　in　such



different　positions　and　with　such　different　powers　as　human



individuals　are；　should　have　exactly　the　same　functions　and　the



same　duties。　　No　two　of　us　have　identical　difficulties；　nor



should　we　be　expected　to　work　out　identical　solutions。　　Each；



from　his　peculiar　angle　of　observation；　takes　in　a　certain　sphere



of　fact　and　trouble；　which　each　must　deal　with　in　a　unique



manner。　　One　of　us　must　soften　himself；　another　must　harden



himself；　one　must　yield　a　point；　another　must　stand　firmin



order　the　better　to　defend　the　position　assigned　him。　　If　an



Emerson　were　forced　to　be　a　Wesley；　or　a　Moody　forced　to　be　a



Whitman；　the　total　human　consciousness　of　the　divine　would



suffer。　　The　divine　can　mean　no　single　quality；　it　must　mean　a



group　of　qualities；　by　being　champions　of　which　in　alternation；



different　men　may　all　find　worthy　missions。　　Each　attitude　being



a　syllable　in　human　nature's　total　message；　it　takes　the　whole　of



us　to　spell　the　meaning　out　completely。　　So　a　〃god　of　battles〃



must　be　allowed　to　be　the　god　for　one　kind　of　person；　a　god　of



peace　and　heaven　and　home；　the　god　for　another。　　We　must　frankly



recognize　the　fact　that　we　live　in　partial　systems；　and　that



parts　are　not　interchangeable　in　the　spiritual　life。　　If　we　are



peevish　and　jealous；　destruction　of　the　self　must　be　an　element



of　our　religion；　why　need　it　be　one　if　we　are　good　and



sympathetic　from　the　outset？　　If　we　are　sick　souls；　we　require　a



religion　of　deliverance；　but　why　think　so　much　of　deliverance；　if



we　are　healthy…minded？＇331＇　　Unquestionably；　some　men　have　the　



completer　experience　and　the　higher　vocation；　here　just　as　in　the



social　world；　but　for　each　man　to　stay　in　his　own　experience；



whate'er　it　be；　and　for　others　to　tolerate　him　there；　is　surely



best。







＇331＇　From　this　point　of　view；　the　contrasts　between　the　healthy



and　the　morbid　mind；　and　between　the　once…born　and　the　twice…born



types；　of　which　I　spoke　in　earlier　lectures　（see　pp。　159…164）；



cease　to　be　the　radical　antagonisms　which　many　think　them。　　The



twice…born　look　down　upon　the　rectilinear　consciousness　of　life



of　the　once…born　as　being　〃mere　morality；〃　and　not　properly



religion。　　〃Dr。　Channing；〃　an　orthodox　minister　is　reported　to



have　said；　〃is　excluded　from　the　highest　form　of　religious　life



by　the　extraordinary　rectitude　of　his　character。〃　　It　is　indeed



true　that　the　outlook　upon　life　of　the　twice…bornholding　as　it



does　more　of　the　element　of　evil　in　solutionis　the　wider　and



completer。　　The　〃heroic〃　or　〃solemn〃　way　in　which　life　comes　to



them　is　a　〃higher　synthesis〃　into　which　healthy…　mindedness　and



morbidness　both　enter　and　combine。　　Evil　is　not　evaded；　but



sublated　in　the　higher　religious　cheer　of　these　persons　（see　pp。



47…52；　354…357）。　　But　the　final　consciousness　which　each　type



reaches　of　union　with　the　divine　has　the　same　practical



significance　for　the　individual；　and　individuals　may　well　be



allowed　to　get　to　it　by　the　channels　which　lie　most　open　to　their



several　temperaments。　　In　the　cases　which　were　quoted　in　Lecture



IV；　of　the　mind…cure　form　of　healthy…mindedness；　we　found



abundant　examples　of　regenerative　process。　　The　severity　of　the



crisis　in　this　process　is　a　matter　of　degree。　　How　long　one　shall



continue　to　drink　the　consciousness　of　evil；　and　when　one　shall



begin　to　short…circuit　and　get　rid　of　it；　are　also　matters　of



amount　and　degree；　so　that　in　many　instances　it　is　quite



arbitrary　whether　we　class　the　individual　as　a　once…born　or　a



twice…born　subject。







But；　you　may　now　ask；　would　not　this　one…sidedness　be　cured　if　we



should　all　espouse　the　science　of　religions　as　our　own　religion？　



In　answering　this　question　I　must　open　again　the　general



relations　of　the　theoretic　to　the　active　life。



















Knowledge　about　a　thing　is　not　the　thing　itself。　　You　remember



what　Al…Ghazzali　told　us　in　the　Lecture　on　Mysticismthat　to



understand　the　causes　of　drunkenness；　as　a　physician　understands



them；　is　not　to　be　drunk。　　A　science　might　come　to　understand



everything　about　the　causes　and　elements　of　religion；　and　might



even　decide　which　elements　were　qualified；　by　their　general



harmony　with　other　branches　of　knowledge；　to　be　considered　true；



and　yet　the　best　man　at　this　science　might　be　the　man　who　found



it　hardest　to　be　personally　devout。　　Tout　savoir　c'est　tout



pardonner。　　The　name　of　Renan　would　doubtless　occur　to　many



persons　as　an　example　of　the　way　in　which　breadth　of　knowledge



may　make　one　only　a　dilettante　in　possibilities；　and　blunt　the



acuteness　of　one's　living　faith。＇332＇　　If　religion　be　a　function



by　which　either　God's　cause　or　man's　cause　is　to　be　really



advanced；　then　he　who　lives　the　life　of　it；　however　narrowly；　is



a　better　servant　than　he　who　merely　knows　about　it；　however　much。　



Knowledge　about　life　is　one　thing；　effective　occupation　of　a



place　in　life；　with　its　dynamic　currents　passing　through　your



being；　is　another。







＇332＇　Compare；　e。g。；　the　quotation　from　Renan　on　p。　37；　above。















For　this　reason；　the　science　of　religions　may　not　be　an



equivalent　for　living　religion；　and　if　we　turn　to　the　inner



difficulties　of　such　a　science；　we　see　that　a　point　comes　when



she　must　drop　the　purely　theoretic　attitude；　and　either　let　her



knots　remain　uncut；　or　have　them　cut　by　active　faith。　　To　see



this；　suppose　that　we　have　our　science　of　religions　constituted



as　a　matter　of　fact。　　Suppose　that　she　has　assimilated　all　the



necessary　historical　material　and　distilled　out　of　it　as　its



essence　the　same　conclusions　which　I　myself　a　few　moments　ago



pronounced。　　S