Pratt H. - The Instability of the Word

If speech is silver and silence golden, then is the accumulated experience of man, of which this proverb is the condensed expression, opposed to the glorification of the “Word”.

If the Babylonian confusion of tongues put a stop to the work in the attempted execution of which it is said to have occurred – the building of a tower, or organization of an ecclesiastical and doctrinal system, by the instrumentality of which presumptuous men proposed to gain and give access to the heavenly mansions: then did the earliest experience of mankind, as transmitted by this parable, show – that dialectic change was already recognised as fatal to the construction and perpetuation of a beaten path, or authoritative teaching, by following which man was to ensure his heavenward course; that the instability of the word was, even in those early days, held to be the great doctrinal subverter.

The spoken word is as fleeting as the breath which gives it utterance.

That breath, the type and vehicle of the spirit which seeks expression through it.

To give a measure of stability and persistency to spirit, it needs materialization, incarnation or clothing in a body.

To give to its equally subtle minister, speech, similar properties, some form of embodiment is as necessary, the type in this being but the reproduction of its antitype.

By process of generation the embodiment of spirit was accomplished, and it was incarnated in the human or made flesh; and, clothed in personal form, was caused to abide upon the earth in a state of temporal stability and persistency.

By the conversion of the spoken into a written tongue, the embodiment of speech was effected, and the word incarnated or made flesh; and, clothed in ideographic, hieroglyphic, or alphabetic forms, was caused to dwell with man in a state of apparent stability and persistency.

But just as in the incarnated spirit the temporal stability was only temporary, the acquired persistency only transient; so in embodied speech the imputed stability and persistency were only apparent and not real – the stability only in semblance, the persistency but in form – the meaning ultimately passing from the framework of the one, just as the spirit passes from the body of the other, in due course; for the embodied word is as liable to the loss of its original significance as is the body to part with its spirit, on the dissolution of their temporary union.

It is a characteristic of speech that it is constantly undergoing dialectic 135 change. That spoken words change their meaning. That words written previously to a change in meaning are subsequently thereto read through the changed meaning. That documents of a sufficient antiquity are misread, misinterpreted and misunderstood, even by those speaking what they suppose to be the same language; while to people using the same tongue but in different grades of life, or in different parts of the same country, the same words used in the same way often convey different meanings.

Hence the written word is apt to become a misleading guide – a guide which only too frequently follows instead of leading those who think to find guidance in it; and then, through the diverse meanings accruing to it and the fluctuating ideas associated with these, it becomes the accredited promoter of varying traditions, and, through these, the accredited imparter of opposing doctrines: for there is a singular affinity between the articulate breathings embodied in the written word and the spirit incarnated in the living man – the one being as fleeting as the other, as subject to the control of the several influences brought to bear upon it.

Speech was at first reflective – the impulsive reflex expression of the impressions made by natural objects and affections on the organs of sense, and only became conventional as its scope was extended.

The written word was at first figurative – a delineated representation of ideas flowing from analogous impressions, and only became alphabetic as it was found necessary to render its defining power more precise.

The symbolic followed the reflective, the parabolic, the conventional form of speech; man seeking in each to give a fuller expression to his ideas and gain a greater facility in perpetuating them. But the germs of instability were quite as much inherent in the ideas of man as in the modes by which he has sought to express and transmit them: for there is no branch of knowledge, no received doctrine in which successive changes have not been constantly taking place, the views of one generation being gradually replaced by those of another – the figures, symbols and parables invariably ending in transmitting a teaching other than that committed to them by their devisers.

The fact is that, strive as he may, man can in no way conquer the instability of his present state and condition.

His conception of the events of his own life and of the influences which determined them, changes with advancing years.

The traditions he receives and relies on are transformed as they pass from one to another.

He builds monuments which endure for ages, like the pyramids, but fail to indicate the purpose for which they were constructed.

He designs symbolical narratives like the signs of the Zodiac, which cease to impart the knowledge committed to their keeping.

He frames systems of writing which melt one into another, until the method of the earlier disappears in that of the later, with that which it 136 was designed to transmit; and which sometimes so entirely supersede each other that the language of the earlier records is read as though it had been that of the later interpreters, with a complete perversion of sense.

He devises sciences and religions which similarly pass into and succeed each other, with the transforming doctrines whose changing or developing teachings they embody and confuse – in all this seeking and thinking to secure the stability and persistency which the conditions of nature render impossible.

But in so building, designing, framing and devising, he constructs instruments through which he hopes to lead and bind the intelligence of his descendants; and his want of success in this, for he always ends in becoming a blind leader of those he has made blind, shows that the instrument through which “God” works – Nature – is stronger than all that opposes it, and ultimately thwarts and overthrows the designs of the Opposer; and as this instrument consistently works here by inducing want of harmony in thought, confusion of idea, and transformation of speech, the question which arises is: can the word, whether spoken or written, whether uttered or embodied – can the word, working through fleshly mediums, or itself made flesh, transmit doctrine with certainty and so be looked upon as an enduring, a trustworthy teacher?

Henry Pratt, M.D.

Footnotes