If, then, we may conclude that what we desire imperiously will be placed within our reach by Him Who has come to satisfy our desires, it follows: 1. That death will not terminate our existence. 2. That our condition after death will be one of happi ness. 3. That this happiness will be eternal. 4. That it will be complete. 5. That it will be exactly commensurate with the desire felt by man. 6. That, consequently, it will be graduated. CHAPTER XX DEVELOPMENT Development, a subject ably treated by others--must be considered here— Were all the propositions of the Faith simultaneously or successively evolved?-Probably by degrees-If development be denied, two other theories must be maintained-Scripture an absolute authority-This the Protestant theory-Its impossibility-Or that development was suddenly arrested—This the Anglican theory, unsatisfactory—Development apparent in the Bible-and in the history of the Church-Development of doctrine-of Christian art-of appreciation of nature—of science of constitutionalism—The limits of development-Conclusion -The prospects of Christianity. HE subject of development is one upon which I would cussed by distinguished theologians of late years, and I can but go over ground already trodden, but that it fits into and completes the system I am expounding, and I could not omit the doctrine of development without leaving this essay incomplete. I can but adopt the arguments of others, and shew their application to and cohesion with the dogma of the Incarnation.1 I have shewn in the preceding chapters that the dogmas 1 Newman: Essay on Development. Oxenham: The Doctrine of the Atonement, Introd. Essay. And Blenkinsopp: The Doctrine of Development in the Bible and in the Church. London, 1869. of Christianity hang upon one another, and follow one another in logical sequence; that if the dogma of the creation be admitted, and a motive be sought for it, that motive can be found in love alone; whence it follows that free-will is a dogmatic consequence which cannot be evaded. From the dogmas of creation and free-will results that of the Incarnation. Accept the Incarnation, and the Atonement follows inevitably, and the Resurrection completes the Atonement. Also, from a right apprehension of the dogma of the Incarnation flow the Church, the Sacramental system, the Real Presence, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice. If any of these consequences be denied, the negation runs back, and corrupts the primary dogmas. The question arises: Was the whole scheme, in all its logical consequences revealed at once, or was the seed, enfolding within it the whole system, given at first to grow and expand as circumstances demanded? This is a most important question. As Mr. Oxenham says: "It can hardly be doubted, that one of the most important theological questions of the day, on which many of our detailed controversies will be found to hinge, and into which they must ultimately be resolved, is that of developments in Christian belief. From failing to recognize this great law of revealed as of scientific truth, thousands are prejudiced against dogmatic Christianity altogether, while others hold it with but feeble and uncertain grasp. Nor can we look with any confidence for the return to unity of separated religious bodies, while some rigidly adhere to the principle of a lifeless and unfruitful tradition, and others insist on an exclusive appeal to the bare letter of Scripture. This question will accordingly be found, if I mistake not, to lie at the root of half our religious disputes, and some understanding upon it is an indispensable preliminary for their appreciation or adjustment."1 The question may be stated simply thus: Were all the propositions of the Catholic faith simultaneously or successively evolved? Now it is evident from what has gone before, that these propositions depend on one another, and the mind has to undergo a process before it can step from one to another. It is therefore more probable that the natural method should have been pursued. For, observe, if the dogma of the Incarnation be accepted by any man, and if he think it out in all its bearings, he must admit all the consequences which the Catholic Church has deduced from it;-he must do so, for they grow out of one another spontaneously. Any Christian community which starts from this dogma must follow the same course, unless it be prepared to tamper with its foundation, to maim the doctrine of the Incarnation, so as to check or destroy its vital power. If the Anglican Church exhibits a tendency, or rather an impulsion, towards full Catholic doctrine, the reason is that active minds will not allow the dogma of the Incarnation to fossilize in an historical deposit, but insist on carrying it out and applying it in its entirety. The only mode of stopping this action is to formally deny the dogma. Among the Lutherans an opposite course has, been run. Luther vitiated the fundamental dogma, by making Christ an imperfect man, i.e. by allowing Him to be the perfect Individual, but not the social Ideal. The consequence is, that the minds of those educated in Lutheran doctrine have denied the Divinity of Christ, and have thus released themselves from the cogency of an argument which must have made itself felt, had they been prepared to admit its premiss. 1 Oxenham, p. 1. The admission of the dogma of the Incarnation is quite sufficient to involve all the consequences. I do not say that every man will evolve the whole system, or that five or six generations will do so, as that depends on the mental activity of the person or the age. But it is inevitable that the community based on that doctrine should rush into Catholicism, when the frost of indifference yields, and the streams of thought begin to trickle once more. There will always be some who cannot go as fast as others, because their minds are more sluggish than others; if they would be content with an assertion that they cannot as yet follow the rush, it would be well, but if they attempt to stand against the avalanche, they will not merely fail to arrest it, but will imperil themselves. This is an intellectual attitude characteristic of Anglicanism. An insularity and a narrow insensibility constitute that temper of mind in which not a few of our best prelates and divines indulge. He who is infected with it is every whit as intolerant as the hip and thigh smiting Puritan. He is never satisfied except in denouncing those waves of religious belief which flow beyond the post he has driven in to limit the rise of the tide, and anathematizing those men whose devout sympathies are above tepidity. Hood ridicules the man who would give another man black eyes for being blind, but surely the folly of the Anglican far exceeds that of Hood's fool, for he attacks the longsighted person because he is not of as narrow a vision as himself; he is the corn-crake assaulting the lark because it dares to soar above the ooze and fen, If the principle of development be denied, only two theories remain on which any positive scheme of Christian doctrine can be maintained; first, that laid down by Chil |