a study of bible-第29节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ir　liberties：　will　a　king　stand　by　that　or　will　he　not？　If　he　will　not；　let　him　remember　Charles　the　First！　And　from　that　day　no　English　king；　no　American　leader；　has　ever　successfully　restricted　English…speaking　people　from　free　access　to　their　great　Book。　It　has　become　a　banner　of　their　liberties。　The　child　was　wiser　than　he　knew　when　he　was　asked　what　lesson　we　may　learn　from　Charles　I。；　and　replied　that　we　may　learn　that　a　man　should　not　lose　his　head　in　times　of　excitement。　Charles　lost　his　head　long　before　he　laid　it　on　the　block。

Besides　the　scene　at　Dover；　we　may　watch　that　great　emigration　of　the　Scotch…Irish　from　Ulster；　beginning　in　1689；　seventy　years　after　the　Puritan　exodus　and　eighty　years　after　the　version　was　issued；　which　peopled　the　backwoods　of　America　with　a　choice；　strong　population。　They　were　only　following　the　right　to　worship　freely；　the　right　to　their　Bible　without　chains　on　its　lids　or　on　the　lips　of　its　preachers。　They　were　making　no　protest　against　Romanism　nor　against　Anglicanism　in　themselves。　They　only　claimed　the　right　to　worship　as　they　would。　Under　William　and　Mary；　after　James　II。　had　fled　to　France；　toleration　became　the　law　in　England；　but　when　Ireland　was　reconquered　by　William's　generals；　the　act　of　toleration　was　not　extended　to　it。　Baptists；　Presbyterians；　all　except　the　small　Anglican　Church；　were　put　under　the　ban　and　forbidden　to　worship。　But　the　Bible　had　made　submission　impossible；　and　there　came　about　that　great　exodus　to　the　new　land　which　has　so　blessed　it。

There　are　other　signal　events　which　might　be　observed。　But　all　the　while　there　would　be　danger　of　magnifying　the　importance　of　events　which　seem　to　prove　the　point。　The　view　needs　to　be　a　more　general　one　instead。　The　period　is　not　longthree　hundred　years　at　the　most　though　it　has　a　background　of　all　English　history。　We　have　already　seen　how　from　the　first　there　have　been　determined　efforts　to　make　the　Bible　common　to　the　people；　yet；　of　course；　the　influence　of　our　version　can　appear　only　in　these　three　hundred　years　since　it　was　issued。　That　short　period　has　not　only　been　interesting　almost　to　the　point　of　excitement　in　English　life；　but　it　covers　virtually　all　American　life。　Take；　therefore；　the　broader　view　of　the　influence　of　the　English　Bible　on　history；　apart　from　these　striking　events。

It　is　to　be　assumed　at　once　that　much　of　its　influence　is　indirect。　Indeed；　its　chief　influence　must　be　through　men　who　prove　to　be　leaders　and　through　that　public　sentiment　without　which　leaders　are　powerless。　If　leaders　live　by　it　and　stand　or　fall　by　its　teaching；　then　their　work　is　its　work。　If　they　find　a　public　sentiment　issuing　from　it　which　gives　them　power；　a　sentiment　which　crystallizes　around　them　when　they　appear；　because　it　is　of　kindred　spirit　with　themselves；　then　the　power　of　that　sentiment　is　the　power　of　the　Bible。　The　influence　of　Pilgrim's　Progress　or　The　Saint's　Rest　is　the　influence　of　Bunyan　and　Baxter；　but　back　of　them　is　the　Bible。　In　language；　in　idea；　in　spirit；　they　were　only　making　the　Bible　a　common　Book　to　their　readers。　Their　value　for　life　and　history　is　the　Bible's　value　for　life　and　history。

The　power　of　great　souls　is　frequently　and　easily　underestimated。　Scientific　study　has　tended　to　that　by　magnifying　visible　conditions　and　by　trying　to　calculate　the　force　of　laws　which　are　in　plain　sight。　Buckle's　theory　of　civilization　has　influenced　our　times　greatly。　It　explains　national　character　as　the　outcome　of　natural　conditions；　and　lays　such　stress　on　circumstances　as　left　it　possible　for　Buckle　to　declare　that　history　and　biography　are　in　different　spheres。　It　is　still　true；　however；　that　most　history　turns　on　biography。　Great　souls　have　been　the　chief　factors　in　great　movements。　Whether　the　movement　could　have　occurred　without　them　will　never　be　possible　to　decide；　if　it　should　be　disputed。　In　a　chemical　laboratory　the　essential　factors　of　any　phenomenon　can　be　determined　by　the　process　of　elimination。　All　the　elements　which　preceded　it　except　one　can　be　introduced；　if　the　result　is　the　same　as　in　its　presence；　manifestly　it　is　not　essential。　So　the　experiment　can　go　on　until　the　result　becomes　different；　when　it　is　evident　that　the　last　omitted　element　is　an　essential　one。　But　no　such　process　is　possible　in　great　historical　movements。　The　only　course　open　to　us　is　to　consider　carefully　the　elements　which　do　appear。

Take　three　great　movements　which　are　easiest　to　follow　in　these　three　centuries。　Whether　the　spiritual　independence　of　England　would　have　been　secured　without　the　Quakers　may　be　debated；　but　this　fact　can　hardly　be　debated：　certainly　it　was　not　so　secured；　whether　or　not　the　Quakers　could　have　been　without　George　Fox；　certainly　they　did　not　occur　without　him。　Take　the　second：　whether　or　not　some　other　movement　could　have　done　what　Puritanism　did　is　hardly　a　question　for　history；　Puritanism　actually　did　the　work　for　England　and　America　which　gave　both　their　strongest　qualities。　There　is　no　testing　the　period　to　see　whether　Puritanism　could　be　left　out。　There　it　stands　as　a　powerful　factor；　and　no　analysis　of　the　history　can　possibly　omit　it。　Or　the　third：　it　is　not　a　question　for　a　historian　whether　English　history　could　have　been　the　same　without　Methodism　and　whether　Methodism　could　have　been　at　all　without　the　Wesleys；　certainly　nothing　took　its　place；　nor　did　any　one　else　stand　at　the　head　of　the　movement。

Here　are　these　three　great　movements；　not　to　seek　others。　All　of　them　have　had　tremendous　influence　in　the　religious　and　political　history　of　both　the　nations　where　they　have　moved　most　freely。　Each　of　them　is　a　direct　and　undisputed　result　of　the　influence　of　the　Bible。　Much　has　already　been　said　of　the　Puritans　in　England；　and　there　will　be　occasion　to　see　what　was　their　influence　in　America。　But　think　for　a　moment　of　the　Quakers。　James　Freeman　Clark　calls　them　the　English　mystics；　certainly　they　were　more　than　that。＇1＇　George　Fox　had　little　learning　but　the　Bible；　that　he　knew　well。　He　first　came　to　himself　out　in　the　fields　alone　with　the　Bible。　He　was　not　stirred　to　the　origin　of　the　movement　nor　to　his　greatest　activity　by　experiences　he　had　in　public　places。　He　came　to　those　public　places　profoundly　affected　by　his　familiarity　with　the　English　Bible。　He　came　at　a　time　when　his　protest　was　needed；　a　protest　against　formalism；　against　mere　outward　conformity。　A　thousand　years　before；　Mohammedanism　had　really　saved　the　Christian　faith　by　its　protest；　violent　and　merciless；　against　its　errors；　challenging　it　to　purity　in　faith　and　life。　Now　Fox　and　the　Quakers　saved　church　life　by　protest　against　church　life。　The　Bible　was　still　the　law；　but　not　the　Bible　which　you　read　for　me；　but　that　which　you　read　for　you　and　I　for　me；　each　of　us　guided　by　an　inner　light。　The　Quaker　movement　was　a　distinct　protest　against　church　formalism　in　the　interests　of　freedom　of　the　Bible。


＇1＇　David　Gregg；　The　Quakers　in　America。


That　Quaker　influence　was　far　stronger　in　America　than　it　ever　proved　to　be　in　England。　George　Fox　himself　visited　the　colonies　and　extended　its　influence。　Three　great　effects　are　easily　traceable。　The　very　presence　of　the　Quakers　in　the　New　England　colonies；　notably　in　Massachusetts；　and　the　persecutions　which　they　endured；　did　more　to　purify　the　Puritans　than　any　other　one　influence。　One　is　only　loyal　to　the　Puritan　character　and　teaching　in　declaring　that　in　the　manner　of　the　Puritans　toward　the　Quakers　they　were　wrong；　they　were　wrong　because　they　were　untrue　to　their　own　belief；　untrue　to　their　own　Bibles；　and　when　the　more　thoughtful　among　them　found　that　they　were　taking　the　attitude　toward　the　Quakers　which　they　had　resented　toward　themselves；　remembering　that　the　Quakers　were　drawing　their　teaching　from　the　same　Bible　as　themselves；　they　were　naturally　checked。　And；　while　the　Quakers　in　New　England　suffered　greatly；　their　suffering　proved　the　purification　of　the　Puritans。　It　accented　and　so　it　removed　the　narrowness　of　Puritan　practice。　Further；　the　Quaker　movement　gave　to　American　history　William　Penn　and　the　whole　constitution　of　Pennsylvania。　It　was　there　that　a　state　first　lived　by　the　principle　which　William　Penn　pronounced：　〃Any　government　is　free　where　the　people　are　a　party　to　the　laws　enacted。〃　So　it　came　about　that　Independence　Hall　is　on　Quaker　soil。　The　Declaration　of　Independence　appeared　there；　and　not　on　Puritan　soil。　It　may　be　there　was　more　freedom　of　thought　in　Pennsylvania。　It　may　be　explained　on　purely　geographical　ground；　Philadelphia　being　the　most　convenient　center　for　the　colonies。　But　it　remains　significant　that　not　on　Cavalier　soil　in　Virginia；　not　on　Dutch　soil　in　New　York；　not　on　Puritan　soil　in　Boston；　but　on　Quaker　soil　in　Philadelphia　the　movement　for　national　independence　crystallized　around　a　general　principle　that　〃any　government　is　free　where　the　people　are　a　party　to　the　laws　enacted；〃　but　that　no　government　is　free　whose　people　have　not　a　voice。　That　is　not　minimizing　the　power　of　Puritanism；　nor　forgetting　Fanueil　Hall　and　the　Tea　Party。　It　only　accents　what　should　be　familiar：　that　Puritanism　drew　into　itself　more　of　the　fighting　element　of　Scripture；　while　the　Quaker　movement　drew　into　itself　more　of　the　uniting；　p