Love, the Law of Life

“Tf we take an ants’ nest, we see not only that every description of work—rearing of progeny, foraging, building, rearing of aphids, and so on—is performed according to the principles of voluntary mutual aid; we must also recognize, with Forel, that the chief, the fundamental feature of the life of many species of ants is the fact and the obligation for every ant of sharing its food, already swallowed and partly digested, with every member of the community which may apply for it. Two ants belonging to two different species or to two hostile nests, when they occasionally meet together, will avoid each other. But two ants belonging to the same nest or to the same colony of nests will approach each other, exchange a few movements with the antennz, and if one of them is hungry or thirsty, and especially if the other has its crop full... it immediately asks for food. The individual thus requested never refuses; it sets apart its mandibles, takes a proper position, and regurgitates a drop of transparent fluid which is licked up by the hungry ant. Regurgitating food for other ants is so prominent a feature in the life of ants (at liberty), and it so constantly recurs both for feeding hungry comrades and for feeding larve, that Forel considers the digestive tube of the ants as consisting of two

different parts, one of which, the posterior, is for the special use of the individual, and the other, the anterior part, is chiefly for the use of the community. If an ant which has its crop full, has been selfish enough to refuse feeding a comrade, it will be treated as an enemy, or even worse.’’!

“The same is true as regards the bees. These small insects, which might easily become the prey of so many birds, and whose honey has so many admirers in all classes of animals from the beetle to the bear, also have none of the protective features derived from mimicry or otherwise, without which an isolatedly living insect hardly could escape wholesale destruction; and yet, owing to the mutual aid they practice, they obtain the wide extension which we know and the intelligence we admire. By working in common they multiply their individual forces; by resorting to a temporary division of labor combined with the capacity of each bee to perform every kind of work when required, they attain such a degree of well-being and safety as no isolated animal can ever expect to achieve, however strong or well armed it may be.’

Besides these cases Kropotkin describes the mutual aid practiced by flocks of cranes, which always place sentries on watch while they are seeking food; by house sparrows, which invariably share any food that they find; by marmots of a certain species, which visit each other’s nests; and by beavers, which construct large dams and live together in colonies.

This mutual aid, however, does not rise to the level of genuine love: it is simply a degree of codperation to which these groups are driven in order to exist at all. The fact that a drove of wild horses escapes from the attack of a pack of wolves by making a ring formation does not show that the horses have any love for each other, but rather that in the exigency this device is the one best adapted for the maintenance of their existence. In other words, mutual aid is practiced instinctively for the purpose of securing food and saving life, and rises no higher than unreasoned, impulsive feeling. It might be objected that this feeling is something more deeply rooted than love; yet in mutual aid there is no such clear self-consciousness as there is in love.

Love originates in unreasoned impulse, but to become genuine love, it must be much stronger than mutual aid. Mother love is not necessarily conscious love: it is a love which defies checking. There is in mother love a strength incomparably greater than there is in mutual aid. Physical love, too, arises in unconscious impulse, but it does not remain on that level. Paul in the fifth chapter of Romans clearly points out the course that love must pursue:

Why, a man will hardly die for the just—though one might bring oneself to die, if need be, for a good man. But God proves his love for us by this, that Christ died for us when we were still sinners. Much more then, now that we are justified

by his blood, shall we be saved by him from wrath. If we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son when we were enemies, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. Not only so, but we triumph in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we now enjoy our reconciliation.!

Here we discover a new starting point for love— love that cannot be content with mere mutual aid.

One country founding a bolshevist state and another endeavoring to create a world by democratic doctrine are examples of a heightened attitude of mutual aid in the struggle for existence; but neither of these efforts can be regarded as having reached human perfection. Mutual aid may be very advantageous for those participating in it, but as viewed by those outside of the group it is too selfish. Moreover, such a group is compelled to brand as criminal, and to eject any member whose conduct has been perverse, or who proves himself ill-adapted for living in the group. For instance, the motto of Bolshevism is, ‘‘He who does not work may not eat”; but how will the Bolshevists deal with cases of the physically unfit, the sick, the aged, the deformed and afflicted, the feebleminded? Is not a love higher than mutual aid demanded?

After all, mutual aid is practicable only in a group of individuals who can depend upon each other. Two men with a cart, one pulling and the other pushing, can practice mutual aid for their common convenience and progress; but individuals unable to work and hence not allowed to have food are automatically barred from the sphere of mutual aid. Then what is to be done for the maintenance of individuals who cannot earn their living? How provide for the foundling picked up on the street corner? In such cases a new starting point for love, superior to mutual aid, is demanded. Here must emerge the new love which strengthens its possessor and moves him to help the weak.

In a word, love is the new force which amends the cosmos, the new design for amelioration where mutual aid cannot avail. Love is creation and expression. As in Romans 5:8, “God proves his love for us by this, that Christ died for us when we were still sinners,” love is the expression of God, and this love is. at the same time creation. Love is the activity which creates in the human soul something which the material world does not possess. Yet there is nothing that suffers so much as love, nothing that has to bear so many crosses. Love! Has it not moved a man to give his own flesh to one incapacitated for working; another sympathetically to nurse an invalid wife for twenty years; others to care for orphans, to pity the aged, to save people, even total strangers, who have fallen by the way in the struggle for existence? Such acts of love as these are utterly beyond the power of mutual aid to accomplish.

Genesis is the story of the creation of the human soul, in which it is related that God made the Garden of Eden in preparation for the creation of man; and formed a world in order to beget two human souls. God provided so grand an environment and completed all these arrangements simply in order to create human life. Our love for men, then, must be a love which embraces their life itself. Our appreciation of the positive contribution (omitting the negative side) of Marx and of Proudhon, too, must be for the sake of life. In order to discover new life in humanity, we must revolutionize the universe and create it afresh,

The transformation of environment, or social revolution, is really no more than the first premise to the creation of the human soul; but Marx, by emphasizing the premise unduly, forgets the souls of men. O Marxists, cease placing the emphasis on the premise, ‘and attack the heart of the matter! Then, at the center of your environment, you will discover your recreated souls.

Love is the feeling which passes between husband and wife, between parent and child. The thing that —

I would like to express to you, that is the creation of love. For love is the new soul-activity which dis-* covers the spirit of God not only in my own heart, | but also in my neighbors, in the aged, the sick, the crippled and disabled; that is, in all weak and broken spirits.

This is the emergence of mercy.

But love moulds still another world. ‘But while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” That is what love does. There are some people who when merely doing a kindness to a person make an appearance of doing something splendid; but there is no true love in such an act. ‘‘ While we were sinners” — that is, people “‘out of law,’’ outside of social discipline or so-called morality—even from such a distance, Christ drew us back. To men who think solely of the struggle for existence, to men who rely only on mutual aid and consider nothing but the physical and psychical aspects of life, this love of Christ is something incomprehensible. Nay, still less are such men able to understand the motive deep doWn in the soul which prompts the endeavor to reform moral derelicts. The creative power of God formed light out of darkness, and this same power, out of darkness and sin, has created a new soul.

/ Why, then, are sinners forgiven? The thought of / Christ’s atonement as something resembling barter or ' exchange of commodities is not current in these days. The atonement means a re-creation in which “self” is melted in the perfect crucible called Christ. When the new creation begins, sin is suddenly dissolved and disappears in just the same way that iron and copper are melted in the electric furnace. It is in this sense _ that I conceive the love of God to have been revealed. _Love means, then, exactly this, that God does make new creations.

The history of love is one of comparatively recent time. There is no record of love in primitive times. It is only nineteen hundred years since the Way of Love had its inception. Long before this, there was, in China, the Kingly Way, as opposed to what is termed Machiavellianism, but the ethics of genuine love was not taught. In Greece and Rome there was the same state of affairs—to such a limited degree had man developed. Genuine love was bestowed only when man began to develop from within.

“Christ’s salvation from sin,’’ as Nietzsche remarks, ‘fis not a feeble thing.” Only a spirit of great strength can forgive sin. Jesus said, ‘‘ Which is the easier thing, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk’?”’ And he purposely took the more difficult course. Such an attitude toward sin could not have been taken in a less advanced society, and no one but a highly developed spirit could speak of saving anyone. In the history of creations the movement to save from sin is without doubt a very recent stage of creative activity. Prior to the time of Christ this type of activity did not exist. Buddhism does not affirm any new creative activity, nor does Mohammedanism. The teaching of Jesus alone clearly declares a conscious, creative activity.

The declaration of Jesus, “I give you a new command—to love one another—as I have loved you, you are to love one another,” was indeed a new commandment. It is a new principle, a new requirement, for creating a new world. It means that when society has developed to the point where men are “saved,” the whole universe also is “saved.”

As a consequence of the appearance of human life upon the earth, animal life has undergone tremendous changes. According to The World of Infe there are more than 300,000 species of insects. Certain species, however, have vanished since human life came into existence, when, for example, men have cut down the jungles of the tropics or burned over the beautiful prairies. Then, too, the animals from fear of man have retreated farther and farther into the mountain wilds. Even certain plants, such as the fly-catching violet, are now found only far back in the mountains. If man had only given them more protection, they would have flourished; but no, man had to sacrifice animals and plants because he wanted to live.

Jesus’ new command is that man should not live merely selfishly, nor yet merely to save the weak, but that he should live in order to be saved from the way of error. Jesus meant this command to apply to the animal and plant worlds as well as to the world of man. For his was a new covenant offered to the whole universe; and to reach this ideal of love the highest effort is required.