W. (William) Sanday.

Christology and personality : containing: I. Christologies ancient and modern, II. Personality in Christ and in ourselves / by William Sanday online

. (page 14 of 18)
Online LibraryW. (William) SandayChristology and personality : containing: I. Christologies ancient and modern, II. Personality in Christ and in ourselves / by William Sanday → online text (page 14 of 18)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

they themselves intended and knew. They did not
know it, in the sense of any human foresight; but
they were well aware that all fulfilments were in
the hand of God, and nothing that He did could
ever surprise them.

I may take such examples as these as instances
of what may be called the normal relation between
modern thought and ancient. The modern view
supplements, adjusts, and within certain limits cor-
rects, the ancient; but it does not lift up its voice
and say. We are right, and the ancients were
wrong; we are they that ought to speak, and
wisdom shall die with us.

This is the kind of principle that I should wish to
apply in all cases of the relation of ancient and
modern in the field of religion, and especially of the
Christian religion.

The most urgent question of the kind at the
present time has to do with the relation of private
judgement to the historic Creeds. An English
churchman, and especially an English cleric, may
state it as a question of the relation of individual
opinion to the Creeds and Articles. I desire to
meet this question as directly and as precisely
as I can.

IX. The Guiding Principle of Symbolism 235

Doubtless there is a marked distinction between
the Creeds and the Articles; but for our present
purpose they may be treated together. We only
have to remind ourselves what the Creeds and
Articles essentially are. The Creeds are, strictly
speaking, the confession of faith of the ancient
Church; the Articles are the confession of faith of
the Church of England in the sixteenth century.
There is a certain process of extension involved in
taking either the Creeds or the Articles as con-
fessions of faith for the present day. But our real
object is to get at the mind of the Universal Church
as lying behind the Creeds, and the mind of the
National Church as lying behind the Articles.
From this point of view it is easy to see that they
are all we have to fall back upon. There are no
other formulated confessions that claim our accep-
tance; and, under present conditions, it would be
hopeless to think of obtaining any. They are the
nearest approach to present-day confessions for the
Catholic Church and for the National Church, and it
is in that sense that we use them. We use the Creeds
in worship as representing the mind of the Church
Universal as nearly as we can come to it. We do
not use the Articles in worship, but we keep them
as a standard of reference when we want to know
what was the mind of the National Church when it
started upon its career of greater independence. The
recitation of the Creeds in public worship is a cor-
porate act, and we take part in it as a corporate act ;

236 Symbolism

for the moment the individual sinks himself in
the society. I may say in passing that for this
reason I am less sensitive than some of my friends,
and less sensitive than I used to be myself, about
such a matter as the recitation of the so-called
Athanasian Creed/ It is not really I who say it,
but the Church which says it. And the Church
does not say it exactly in the way of which it
would most approve to-day, but we in the Church of
England make use of the only form we have — or
rather of this as one of the three only forms we
have — in regard to which we have a definite his-
torical guarantee that they really stand for the mind
of the Church Universal. If I were to analyse my
own consciousness in repeating the Creed, I should
say that I repeat it, not as an individual, but as
a member of the Church. I do not feel that I am
responsible for it; what I am responsible for is the
desire to enter into the mind of the Church. I
tacitly correct the defects of expression, because I
believe that the Church would correct them if it
could, but it cannot. For the Creed as it stands the
Church is responsible, and not I.

The use of the Creeds in public worship is one
thing, and their use as a standard of opinion is
another. As a standard of opinion, again, we must
distinguish between their use for public purposes

* It does not follow that I am in favour of retaining the
compulsory use of the Creed as it stands, which is a burden
to so many consciences.

IX. The Guiding Principle of Symbolism 237

and for private. With private opinion, as I con-
ceive, the world at large is not concerned. On this
head I do not feel called upon to speak at all, and
yet I will say a few words in case they should
possibly be helpful to others. The way, then, in
which I myself regard the Creeds, from this most
individual and personal point of view, is as great
outstanding historical monuments of the faith of the
Church. As such I cannot but look upon them
with veneration. As such I desire as well as I can
to conform my own opinions to them. But the same
principle comes into play that I have just been
laying down. I desire to enter into the mind of the
Church. I desire to the utmost of my ability to be
loyal to that mind. But, at the same time, I cannot
forget that the critical moments in the composition
of the Creeds were in the fourth and fifth centuries,
and that they have never been revised or corrected
since. It is impossible that the thought and lan-
guage of those centuries should exactly coincide
with the genuine, spontaneous, unbiased, scientific
— or that aims at being scientific — thought and
language of the present day. We must modernize,
whether we will or no. But, indeed, one does not
aim at a mechanical coincidence. I suppose that
as a matter of fact not the Creeds alone, but the
whole course of history as culminating in the Creeds,
looms before the mind ; and the mind, not so much
consciously as subconsciously, plays upon the image
which it receives, and tries to reduce it to harmony

238 Symbolism

with the results of its own independent research.
It is only by an effort that one can bring the process
to a head in the precise formulation of detail. But
all the time there is shaping itself an indefinable
background of thought, which is like the indefinable
background of character. This background (if we
are to call it so) belongs to the subconscious rather
than to the conscious region of mental activity. It
constitutes what we call the 'self, and it is never at
rest, but is always growing; and it is this which in
the end brings about the fusion of old and new.
The particular form of fusion each one of us must
work out for himself. To his own Master he stands
or falls.

If we believe that the world is one, and that the
whole course of history is one, the working out of
a single divine purpose, coherent and continuous in
all its parts — whether we are able to see the coher-
ence and continuity or not; if we have this fixed
belief in our minds, then the process will not be
really so difficult as it may appear. It will doubtless
contain gaps — abundance of gaps; it is not to be
expected that any one individual, under present
conditions, should be able to work out an absolutely
consistent theory of the universe from beginning to
end. But the great thing is that the main outlines
are marked out for us; if we come to a gap, we
know why it is a gap; and we also know that it is
sure to be filled up in time. But all that we need is
patience; and faith is the mother of patience. If

IX. The Guiding Principle of Symbolism 239

we once have an assured hold on God in Christ, all
the rest will come, when and as He wills.

The clue that guides us through this mighty maze
is the principle of continuity. But, once more, we
have to remember that this continuity is not
mechanical. What we have to look for, and what
we may expect to find, is not any rigid and formal
identity of expression; it is an identity not of the
letter but of the spirit. In other words, the con-
tinuous thread that we hold in our hands is truth
to type, the genuine Christian type, manifested at
sundry times and in divers manners, but preserving
throughout its essential oneness and its essential


Abbott, E. A., 126 f .
Alexandria, School of, 51.

— Synod of, 39.
Ambrose, St., 42, 216.

dvTc8o(TC^j 54.

Antioch, School of, 51 f,

— Synods of, 38 f .
ApoUinarisof Laodicea, 49-52.
Apologists, The, 14 ff.
Apostles' Creed, 35; see also

Apostolic Fathers, 11 f.
Arian Controversy, 40 ff.
Artemas, or Artemon, 37.
Asclepiodotus, 37.
Augustine, St., 46 ff., 216.

Bacon, B. W., 202.
Basil of Caesarea, 43.
Biedermann, A. E., 63.
Bigg, C, 95.
Binitarian, 12.
Blake, W., 177.
Bousset, W., 117.
Bright, W., 75 ff.
Browning, R., 154, 177, 222-7.

Callistus, 40.
Carpenter, W. B., 142.
Cambridge Biblical Essays,

Celsus, 18.

Chalcedon, Council of, 52 f.,

Chesterton, G. K., 195.
Christology, 49, 59, 96 ff., 103

ff., 113, 118 ff., 165 ff. and

Christus-Idee, 64 f ., 87.

— Prinzip, 64, 87.

— Person, 64, 87, 90.
Church, Mind of the, 235 ff

— Universal, 104.

Church Quarterly Review, 75,

Clement of Rome, 12.
communicatio idiomatum, 54.
Consciousness of Christ, 165-

85, 215.
Continuity, Principle of, vii,

102, 229, 232, 238 f .
Creeds, The, vi, 115, 234-8.

Denney, J., 114 f., 125 f., 132.
Dioscorus, 51.
Docetism, 7 ff., 215.
Dorner, I. A., 69 ff.
Du Bose, W. P., 93 f., 107,
127, 130 f., 151.

Eastern Church, 53.

^vunoffzaro^^ 54.
Equivalence, Principle of, 227.
Eusebius of Vercelli, 42.



Fairbairn, A. M., 72, 7.5.

Gardner, P., 198-201, 231 f.
German Theology, 59, 98 ff.,

Gess, W. F., 72.
Gifford, E. H., 75 f .
Gnosticism, 12 ff.
Godet, F., 72 f .
Gore, Bp. C, 74-7, 91 f.
Green, T. H., 65-9, 88 f .
Gregory of Elvira, 46.

— Nazianzen, 43, 51.

— Nyssen, 43.

Haring, Th., 215.

Hall, F. J., 75.

Hamilton, Sir W., 137.

Harnack, A., 14 ff., 44 f., 117.


Herrmann, W., 105 ff.

Hermas, 12.

Hilary of Poitiers, 42, 46, 216.

Holland, H. S., 201 f ., 210.

Homoousion, 38 f ., 168.

Hosius, 42.

Hiigel, Baron F. von, 123, 151.

Humanitarianism, 37, 43.

Humanity (collective), 124 ff.

hypostasis, 38 f .

Idealism, 60, 79.
Ignatius, 10 f .
Incarnation, 191-5.
Indwelling, Divine, 9, 11, 80,

chaps. VI- VIII passim; see

also Mysticism.

Inge, W. R., 151.
Irenaeus, 21-4, 47.

Jastrow, J., 141 f.

James, W., 137 f., 142, 146-9.

Jesus or Christ? 133, chap.

VIII passim.
John, St., 121 ff.

— Acts of, 8 f .

John of Damascus, 53.
Jones, H., 206-9.

— R. M., 151.
Jiilicher, A., 117.

Justin Martyr, 14, 23 f.; see
also Apologists.

Kaftan, J., 215.

— Th., 215.
Kant, I., 79.
Kenosis, 71-8.
Kunze, J., 214.

Leo I, Pope, 55, 92.
Leontius of Byzantium, 53 f .
Lindsay, J., 21.
Lodge, Sir O., 190-5.
Logos, Doctrine of, 15-21,38,

Loofs, F., 14 ff., 48, 73, 216.
Lutgert, W., 150.
Luther, 108, 230 f .

Martin I, Pope, 55.
Mason, A. J., 75.
Milton, J., 228.
95, 127 ff., 152 f ., 155 f .



Modern Positive, 102.
Monarchians, 36-40.
Monophy sites, 52.
Moorhoiise, Bp. J., 75.
Moulton, J. H., 195.
Morin, Dom G., 46.
Mysticism, 109, 123, 149-59;
see also Indwelling.

Natures: ^ee Two Natures.
Neo-Platonism, 46, 48.
Nestorians, 52.
Nicene Creed, 43; see also

Noetus, 39 f .
Nolloth, C. F., 115.

Origen, 18 ff.
Orr, J., 21.
Ottley, R. L., 75.

Pantheism, 153.
Paul, St., 121 ff.
Paul of Samosata, 38.
Personality, 45, 153.
Powell, H. C, 75 f.
Pragmatism, 95 f.
Praxeas, 39.

Pringle-Pattison, A. S., 21.
Prophecy, 233 ff.
Psychology, chaps. VT-VIII

Rashdall, H., 75, 77.
Rationalism, 59, 79.
Recapitulation, Doctrine of,

Revelation, 229-32.

Ritschl, A., 78 f., 81 ff., 95 f.
Ritschlians, 103-9, 116 f.
Roberts, R., 195.

Sabellians, 40.
Sabellius, 39.
Schader, E., 215.
Schleiermacher, F. D. E., 79 ff.
Schmiedel, P. W., 196, 203-6,

Self, Subliminal, 139, and

chaps. VI-VIII passim.
Soden, Freiherr H. von, 117.
Son of Man, 124.
Spirit, Holy, 25-8, 39, 128-31,

Strauss, D. F., 61-3.
Stubbs, Bp. W., 75.
Subconscious, The, chaps.

VI-VIII passim, 238.
Symbolism, chap. IX passim.
Synoptic Gospels, 119 f.

Tennyson, A., 177.

Tertullian, 21 f., 24-9.

Theodotus of Byzantium, 37.

— the Banker, 37.

Theology and Religion, 1 ff.

Theophany, 7.

Theophilus of Alexandria, 51.

Thieme, K., 214-16.

Thomasius, G., 72, 78.

Thompson, J. M., 212 f .

Tritheism, 26, 47.

Trinitarian language and doc-
trine, 11 ff., 25-9, 39, 44-9,
105 f., 132.



Two Natures, Doctrine of,
24 f., 37, 50, 52-5, 90 f., 165 f.
Two Wills, 53.

Ulfilas, 41.

Unconscious, The, chaps, VI-
VIII passim.

Valentinians, 13.

Warfield, B. B., 115.
Weinel, H., 196 ff.
Weiss, J., 117.
Wernle, P., 117.
Westcott, Bp. B. F., 91.
Western Church, 36.
Weston, Bp. F., 76, 169-73,

Wordsworth, W., 1, 177, 229.



I. Personality in Ourselves ... 3

II. Personality in Ourselves and in

Christ 29

III. Retrospect 53





The object of this lecture is to take up and
continue the course which I began about this time
last year and the book in which it was embodied.
The leading idea of those lectures was expressly
described as tentative; it could not well be other-
wise, because it sought for a solution of old
questions in a rather new direction. On this side
therefore the book invited criticism. When one is
feeling one's way in any subject, it is always a help
to see at what points questions are raised. Substan-
tial help of this kind has been given me; and I have
also in the meantime been trying to carry my own
thought one or two steps further. The net result of
this process I should now like to lav before you, in
the hope that with further co-operation a further
advance'^may be made.

I would only ask you to understand that what

I am going to put before you is still very tentative.

I do not think there is any heresy in it — at least not

so far as the theology is concerned ; I am not so sure

about the philosophy. But if there is, I shall not

go to the stake for it; in other words, I am quite

prepared to receive correction, and that from any



4 The Problem of Personality

To prove that I am in earnest in this, I have
asked leave to print as footnotes some criticisms on
the rough draft of these lectures for which I have
to thank a friend, Professor H. R. Mackintosh of
Edinburgh, who reviewed my book very carefully
and instructively in The Expository Times. I
don't mind putting my ideas, such as they are, upon
the dissecting board, if by so doing I can help you
to think more clearly and more truly. I am a
believer in the maxim that

men may rise on stepping stones
Of their dead selves to higher things ;

and to be afraid of being found wrong is a foppery
to which I do not mean to yield.

I was endeavouring to feel my way, with all
reverence and caution, into that great mystery
which we call the Incarnation. I was endeavouring
to find for it an expression which might be called
modern, in the sense that it was brought into
relation with modern methods and ideas as in
ancient Theology it had been brought into relation
with ancient ideas. And the direction in which
I sought to do this was suggested by a simple
consideration of the conditions of the problem.
The Incarnation is the meeting of Human and
Divine. But have we no experience in ourselves of
a meeting of human and divine.^ Yes, I was in-
clined to say, we have such an experience. And, if

/. Personality in Ourselves 5

we look at it steadily enough, I believe we shall
find this throw some light on the higher problem.
There was one point that seemed to come out as
we contemplate those divine influences which we
have reason to believe are operative in ourselves.
They do from time to time make themselves felt in
consciousness. But when we say ' make themselves
felt ', the process must not be thought of too directly.
We recognize them by their effects. As St. Paul
says, 'The fruits of the Spirit are love, joy, peace,
long-suffering' and the like. We see the product,
and we infer the cause. The 'fruits' lie upon the
surface; but the working of the Spirit is beneath
the surface; it takes place in regions that are
beyond our observation. The influence of the
Spirit plays upon the roots of our being; and that
to such an extent that it does not seem too much
to say that these lower regions are the proper
sphere within which the Spirit of God acts upon
the soul of man.^ In this fact — so far as it is a

^ 'When the Spirit presents and commends Christ to me, does
what happens go on, properly and predominantly, in the "lower
regions"? I should grant, naturally, that all conscious process
had unconscious as its concomitant "underside" ' (H. R. M.). —
If I may say so, I like that expression ' its concomitant " underside " '.
I am tempted to think that if my friend would develop all that he
himself means by it, we might be found nearer together than we
may perhaps seem. In any case, the diflPerence between us is only
that perhaps I attach more importance to this ' underside ' than he
does. And by 'attaching more importance' to it, I mean that I
regard a larger part of the psychical process as falling within it.
See the next note.

6 The Problem of Personality

fact — I seemed to see the key to the nature of the
union between the human and divine in Christ.

But I wilHngly admit that this suggestion that I
made raises many questions, and that the discussion
cannot rest at the point at which I left it.

There is indeed one objection to which I exposed
myself that I should like to clear away, and that
I believe I can clear away, at once. More than one
of my reviewers has thought that I gave an undue
preference to the unconscious and subconscious
states over the conscious, that I treated these states
as superior in themselves. That was not at all my
intention. I was simply trying to describe the
psychical processes as well as I could without any
attempt to construct a comparative scale of values.
But it is true that I was dealing with a particular
limited group of phenomena, and if I was supposed
to be doing more than this the space that I gave to
these might easily seem disproportionate. But I
had no mind to write a general treatise on Psychol-
ogy. If I left out a great deal that might naturally
come into such a treatise, it was not that I intended
to deny or undervalue it, but only that I took it for
granted. I meant what I had to say to be added to
our current ideas, and not as a substitute for them.
I do not doubt that I ought to have made this
clearer. But, however that may be, I shall try now
to repair the fault. The purpose of these two lec-
tures is to fill up, as well as I can, the gap that was
left, to take a wider survey and to set the processes

/. Personality in Ourselves 7

that I described more in their place in the whole
economy of human nature.

Another cause may have contributed to the mis-
taken impression to which I referred. I was speak-
ing of the action and influence of the Spirit of God
upon the soul. But w^e instinctively give to the
Divine precedence over the human; and it is quite
possible that I may in that sense have used language
w^hich seemed to ascribe to processes in which this
Divine action was involved something of a higher
dignity. But, here again, I was not deliberately
constructing a table of values. If I had been doing
so, I believe that I should have been more guarded;
because values stand in relation to ends, and must
be judged in view of this relation. A process higher
in itself, may be lower in its bearing upon human
life, and especially in its bearing upon human
responsibility.* From this point of view without
doubt conscious states take precedence of sub- and

* My friend writes: 'The objection, as it appears to me, is not
against your ascribing a higher vahie to process in which the Divine
is involved; that, probably, all would consent to. But the question
rather is: In which processes is the Divine most involved, and
most valuably present; and to this I should answer, in conscious
processes, as faith and love.' — Are not 'faith and love', as psychical
processes of which we are conscious, strictly human ? I should
naturally speak of them as results or products of Divine influence,
and not of the Divine influence as consciously (if I may interpolate
the word) involved or present in them. In my book I spoke of
the index moving over the dial-plate; and I should say that faith
and love were what the index pointed to, but not the weight or force
by which it is moved; that is hidden below out of sight.

8 The Problem of Personality

unconscious. It is in the light of day that those
decisions are taken which leave the deepest mark
upon character.

I quite agree that character is built up by the
series of moral judgements. I never for a moment
meant to imply anything else. It did not even oc-
cur to me that I should be challenged on this head.
Once more, I took for granted all the common doc-
trine on these subjects. My critics have given me
credit for being more of an innovator than I pro-
posed to myself to be. But, be that as it may,
I shall try on the present occasion to place the point
that I desire to state in its fuller setting. I shall
try to trace more directly than I did the relation of
those sub- and unconscious motions to the whole
sum of human life, and especially to that central
part of it that we call the Self or Person.

I cannot ascertain that even among professed
philosophers there is any generally accepted doc-
trine of Personality. A German friend whom I can
implicitly trust tells me that there is no monograph
on this subject in German. The most direct discus-
sion of the subject that I can find, from the point of
view from which I am approaching it, is an essay by
the late Professor William Wallace in the volume
of collected Lectures and Essays published after his
lamented death in 1898. Unfortunately, this essay
was not even written for publication, and it had
not the advantage of revision by its author. It is
evidently the work of a real philosopher, which is

I. Perso7iality in Ourselves 9

far more than I can pretend to be myself. Still I
confess that the essay makes upon me the impres-
sion — and in the circumstances it is perhaps not
surprising that it should do so — that it is rather
what might be called the rough copy for an article,
than a finished piece of work. Ideas run into each
other without sufficient discrimination; and there
seems to me to be a want of articulate construction
about the whole. I do not doubt that the second
draft would have differed considerably from the

I have read with much interest a volume entitled
Personalism (London, 1908) by the late Professor
Borden P. Bowne. This (if I may be allowed to
say so) seems to be of great value on the general
question of method in philosophy. If I understand
the book aright, it is a plea for looking out upon
the world from the point of view of personality as
a whole, as contrasted with the method of purely
intellectual abstraction that has been so much in
vogue. To one who, like myself, is inclined to lay
stress on the relativity of all our thinking, and who
is content that his own thinking should be frankly
relative, this point of view is very attractive. For
a philosophical background to the considerations
that I am about to offer, I would gladly go to Pro-
fessor Bowne. But I do not think that he any-
where defines or analyses w hat he means by Person ;
he seems to assume the varied contents of the word.

More directly helpful for our purpose is the

10 The Problem of Personality

chapter on 'Self as Ideal Construction' in Professor
G. F. Stout's Manual of Psychology (2nd edition,
1907). Professor Stout is a clear and satisfactory
writer; and I find most of what I want in his book
— some things perhaps implied rather than directly
stated. I hope I may be forgiven if I say — speak-
ing purely as a layman and from the outside- — that
I doubt if this is quite one of his best chapters.
Once again, the construction does not altogether
please me; but that is perhaps because I come to
it with questions of my own which are not exactly
those that were present to the mind of the writer.

The writings of M. Bergson are full of subtle and
delicate and beautiful remarks, and I have every
sympathy with his point of view. It is possible
that I ought to have found in these writings more

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 16 17 18

Online LibraryW. (William) SandayChristology and personality : containing: I. Christologies ancient and modern, II. Personality in Christ and in ourselves / by William Sanday → online text (page 14 of 18)