A. Norman Rowland. NATURALNESS.— Few terms are more fruitful of fallacious thought than the group including ' nature,' ' natural,' ' naturalness.' In modern nsage they are very frequent, and the range of varied meanings which they cover is wide. Thus we speak
of natural instinct, natural conduct, natural re- ligion, natural science, and the natural creation, though the single epithet has a different sense in every case. Two phrases like ' the law of nature ' and ' natural law ' are verbally equivalent, yet they are very different in significance, the one drawing its connotation from Roman jurisprudence, the other from modern science ; the one being con- cerned entirely with human thought and conduct, the other mainly with inanimate phenomena or those regions of Biology which include creatures of lower organization than man. It is always need- ful to be on one's guard against the fallacies which so easily arise through such changes in the meaning of a term ; for they are apt to be unnoticed when the term itself is constant. But the danger becomes greater when these terms are carried back to a period in which they were in far less frequent use, and when they covered a smaller range of meaning. This Avas the case in the age of the NT. We have now generalized our ideas, and we speak of ' Nature ' in the sense of the Cosmos. It is com- monly with a reference more or less definite to the observed order of the Cosmos as a whole that we employ the words 'natural,' 'naturalness'; although there are many instances also in which they have a narrower reference. But in antiquity it was either a particular person or thing, or else a particular class of persons or things — a kind— which was in view ; and the nature of this group of instances was the standard of naturalness. So ' life according to nature ' meant, not what was in harmony with the universe, nor even what corre- sponded with environment, but what fulfilled the nature of the man himself. W^hat was ' contrary to nature,' on the other hand, was not what put a man into antagonism with his surroundings, but what amounted to violence done to his better self. The later Stoics, indeed, made approach to the modern use in some directions, and in turn influ- enced legal principles, and later movements of thought which sought a ' return to nature,' such as that with Avhich the name of Rousseau is connected; but they afford no more than an exception to the general truth that in ancient times the use of the terms under consideration was particularist, while to-day it is commonly generalized or even cosmical.
An examination of the passages in the NT in which natural- ness is spoken of bears out this difference fully. In Ja 3", e.g., the ' nature of beasts ' {ifu<n; Svipiui) is contrasted with human nature (>; <pi,<n; ij at6paiTi\r;) ; and St. Paul opposes the teaching- of nature in the c^se of the Gentiles to the teaching of law in the case of Jews (Ro 2i-*- 2") ; whUe in 2 P 1^ we read of ' a Divine nature ' (Wi/a 0Co-is). But all such instances which develop the idea of naturalness lie outside the Gospels, and most of them occur in the writings of St. Paul. It is not necessarj', therefore, to discuss them fully here ; it may suffice to refer to an instruc- tive note by Dr. Annitage Robinson in his Com. on the Epistle to the Ephesians (on 23), pp. 49-51.
The words which are rendered by ' nature ' or the like in the EV are (puais, (pvcrtKos, ofj-oioiradris, and xf/vxiKdi, but the last is only translated ' natural ' Avliere it stands opposed to Trv€Vfj,aTi.K6s, and there the rendering is not satisfactory though none better is easily found. None of these words, however, occurs in the Gospels at all : and the entire absence from the Gospels of terms directly exjiressive of naturalness is in itself a warning against attempt- ing to bring the facts of Jesus Christ's life under this category without care and caution.
There is, lioAvever, profound truth in Tertullian's saying, 'Anima naturaliter Christiana,' and it is no false extension of this if one speak of the natural- ness of Jesus Christ as perfect, since in Him the best and highest nature of man is shown complete and unalloyed for once. Such a mode of expression would only serve to heighten the supplementary aspect of the truth Avhich comes out in the contrast that St. Paul emphasizes between the first Adam as the ' natural man ' {\pvxi-K6s), and the last Adam
r
NATUKE, NATURAL PHEXOMEXA Js'ATURE, NATURAL PHENOMENA 233
as the 'life-giving spirit' (1 Co 15'^). It is along this line that tlie explanation must be sought of what suiue liave felt as a serious dirtieulty, namely, tiiat few principles in Christ's teai-iiing can be in- stanced to which parallels of earlier date may not be adduceil. Not only the writings of the OT Prophets and Psalmists, but also the religious teachers of other races, such as Gautama, Epic- tetus, or those collected in the Tao of China, attoril numerous anticipations (jf the Lord's words. It could not l)e otlierwise if the true nature of man be realized in Him : if God purposed 'to sum up all things in Christ' (Eph P") ; if He was 'the true light which lighteth every man ' (Jn P). A similar consideration enables one to understand the re- markable fact tiiat Christ's appeal is to men of all races. ' One touch of nature makes the whole world kin': apart from this, tlie fact, to which ever-widening experience bears witness, that in all races ' his sheep hear his voice,' would be most wonderful, not to .say inexplicable.