The Prophetic Telegraph - No.75
I suppose the above title
might lead the reader to think that I am about to expound the miracle of
metamorphosis - how a caterpillar changes into a butterfly - and its spiritual
significance to a believer. And I grant that it would be a goodly theme. But
such is not the purpose of this paper. In it I am only interested in
researching the behaviour of the caterpillar, and for very good reasons which will
become apparent as we proceed.
Butterflies lay millions of eggs. If all of them were to come to maturity as
adult insects, the world would be overrun by them. But there is a phenomenal
loss at every stage, due to predators, lack of food, bad environmental
conditions, and freak weather. Entomologists tell us that as the population of
each variety of butterfly remains more or less constant, only one pair finally
wins through for each mating pair. All the rest fall by the wayside.
So what happens in the life of a caterpillar before it turns into a chrysalis?
Is it just a case of emerging from the egg and eating and growing until it is
of full size? I suppose most people would, at a guess, think along such lines.
The fact that such assertions are far from the truth means that we need to
learn from those who have made a detailed study of insect behaviour. What I
have learned from the textbooks has made such an impression on me, that I would
like to share with you the story of "Caterpillar Magic."
The newly emerged caterpillar probably starts its life by eating the egg-case
from which it has just hatched. Apparently the case contains vital ingredients
necessary to its growth. From that moment onwards there is vigorous and
continuous growth. The size of the Larva increases at an amazing rate. But this
soon produces problems. (At least we might put it that way. The problems are
not arbitrary, but part of the Master's design.)
In point of fact the insect's skin becomes too tight to allow any further
expansion, and so it stops eating for a short while so as to perform an amazing
experiment. From its tiny brain two distinct hormones are secreted into the
body, the effect of which causes the twin layers of its skin to separate. The
outer skin is called the CUTICLE, and the inner skin the EPIDERMIS. The cuticle
is tough and cannot expand any further, but the epidermis is soft. Then into
the space between these layers a digestive juice of enzymes is injected, called
the MOULTING FLUID. This has a double effect. In the first place, about 90% of
the cuticle is gradually dissolved into the fluid, and secondly, the epidermis
grows in size. But of course, there is no room for such growth, and therefore
as it takes place, it has to wrinkle to find room to develop.
At this stage, all that is good from the cuticle has been reabsorbed into the
body, and conditions are ready for the MOULT. The cuticle is made to burst by
the caterpillar taking in quantities of air and "blowing itself up".
The crack occurs along a line of weakness designed for that purpose. On
emerging, the caterpillar now has the freedom for its skin to grow, and by
taking in more air the body is literally blown up in size until the new skin
(the original epidermis) is smoothed out from its wrinkled state.
As soon as this process is complete, the caterpillar begins its voracious
eating programme once again. Little further growth of the skin occurs. Internal
consolidation takes place until the outer skin once again becomes too tight.
And so the process repeats itself, and during the time it takes to reach
maturity as a caterpillar, some five or six of these moults occur.
The following graph shows how the actual size of the caterpillar changes during
its life. The proper name given to the moult is ECDYSIS, and the inbetween
stages are called INSTARS. Therefore the first instar lasts from hatching to
the first moult, or ecdysis; and the second instar from then until the next
ecdysis, and so on.
A graph reveals that quite the majority of the caterpillar's growth occurs
during ecdysis, whilst the in-between stages, or instars, show merely the
consolidation of what. has just been achieved And so we learn that far from a
gradual steady growth programme, the caterpillar grows in distinct
"steps" until it reaches maturity at the point P on the diagram,
which stands for PUPATION, or chrysalis-forming.
There is no natural reason why growth should occur in this manner. It cannot be
explained by the theory of evolution. By that bankrupt theory one might have
expected a less hazardous process to occur, but this is not so. And when it
comes to the pupal stage (the chrysalis), it is far from being "the
survival of the fittest", in fact can anything be quite so fragile and
easily destroyed as a dead-looking chrysalis? No, there must be a Mind behind
all these magical mysteries. Why should the God of Creation have designed the
caterpillar to grow in such a manner? Can we enter into the rationale behind
the magic, and ask the Creator to reveal His purposes? I think we can. But
before asking such questions, there is more science to learn.
I spoke of TWO hormones being secreted from the brain of the caterpillar to
induce moulting. Why two? The first is called the MOULTING HORMONE, and the
second the JUVENILE HORMONE. When BOTH hormones are injected into the body of
the caterpillar, then ecdysis occurs, but if only the moulting hormone is
injected, the chrysalis phase is triggered off. Scientists have tested this by
causing a fully-grown caterpillar to enter an EXTRA moult by injecting the juvenile
hormone from another insect. The result is an over-sized caterpillar, which
then produces an extra large butterfly. Conversely, the tiny gland that houses
the juvenile hormone may be removed BEFORE the insect is fully grown, and then
pupation occurs at an earlier stage, producing a smaller version of the
butterfly. In neither case does any benefit accrue to the butterfly. Neither
the extra large nor the smaller variety possess characteristics which might be
called an "improvement". Both are usually less able to live as normal
adults.
But in the fossil records, butterfly imprints have been found which are many
times the size of butterflies as we know them today. I would hazard a
suggestion that before the flood, the Lord ordered many more ecdyses to occur
than is the current allowance. Hence the final size of the caterpillars would
have been very much bigger than we know them. Just as man's life span was
reduced to about one twelfth of what it used to be, so also in the animal world
there has been a commensurate reduction.
So much for the science. What can we learn from it? Has it any pictorial
teaching for us? I believe it has, but more than likely it is one of those
"hidden things", of which I wrote in the last paper.
The caterpillar's life was punctuated by rather dramatic changes. There was
nothing steady about the way in which it grew in size. What happens in our own
lives? Could it he that the Lord desires to engineer our circumstances so that
we can grow to full manhood, and that this will require times of dramatic
change? I wonder how many of our readers, on looking back over many years of
Christian experience, might find a pattern rather similar to that of the
caterpillar. Let me illustrate what I mean.
As a young Christian in my early twenties I was introduced to a form of
teaching which gave me a mighty thrust towards deep Bible study. Before this I
had been in the midst of a great deal of evangelistic work with a then well
known preacher. I decided to quit the evangelistic scene and devote myself to
study. Being young, I did so without very much grace towards those I left
behind! But as I look back now, I can see very clearly the necessity of that
change, and what it did for me over subsequent years. This is not to
"knock" evangelist work. God forbid! But each one of us needs to
follow the clear leading of the Lord through our lives. Some are
"evangelists", whilst others are "teachers", and each has a
place in the Lord's work. I see, looking back, that the Lord was calling me to
a teaching ministry rather than to an evangelistic ministry.
What was this but an "ecdysis"? I left behind the old
"skin" and within a brief space of time found a great "expansion
"in my Christian life, a vigorous growth for which I still thank the Lord.
But as with the caterpillar, very little of the previous "skin" was
shed. Most of it was absorbed into my system. And that which had been shed was
not "bad", any more than the caterpillar's previous skin was bad. It
was something that had served its purpose and now had to be shed.
This has not been the only such change in my circumstances. Neither has it been
static in the lives of my wife and I as a married couple. We can look back to
several occasions when a quite dramatic change has occurred, and each time the
"new" situation brought about a rapid growth in the understanding of
the things of the Lord.
It is because of this evaluation of our own experience in the light of the
"caterpillar magic" that I felt constrained to write this article,
And I think it may be helpful to some, who might have thought that God required
them to be "static" as a sign of being "stable". But these
two things are not necessarily the same. I am reminded of the day in which I
was idly playing with my wrist-watch, and the Lord spoke to me very clearly. He
said, "My church is like your watch."
(Incidentally, it is an automatic, self-wind watch.) "As long
as there is continual movement, there is growth, but with no change the church
becomes like your watch which would simply wind down and stop."
Often these days one hears about splits in churches. Some want to go a new way,
but others choose rather to retain their traditional stance. And there is often
a degree of condemnation towards those who opt out, and begin something new by
themselves. And again, one hears that such divisions occur with a little
acrimony and disharmony amongst the brethren, just like my own example referred
to above. But should we rather look upon such happenings in a more mature
light? Perhaps the Lord is urging some to move, whilst others are not ready for
it? And knowing our propensity for uncharitable behaviour "in the
flesh" it is often a time of regret, re-evaluation, separation between
erstwhile friends, and so on. Rather than bewail the situation, the "caterpillar
magic" should guide us into a more generous-spirited attitude, to realise
that probably neither group was in the wrong. It was just that God was
"shaking up His automatic watch" to ensure that it didn't run down
and go to sleep!
In the New Testament there may be a part of our Lord's teaching which is very
similar to this. He spoke on one occasion about not putting pieces of new cloth
on old garments, and not putting new wine into old bottles. On examining the
Greek of this passage, I found that the "new" cloth was in fact
"unfulled, uncarded, or unshrunk" cloth. In other words if it was
used to patch up an older garment, then as soon as it was washed, the new piece
would shrink, and create a rent worse than that it was intended to mend.
Similarly the "new wine" was very active, and not yet suitable for
consumption, thereby making people light-headed and a bit "merry".
This activity would very soon react on an old skin, and cause it to burst.
Better to keep BOTH separate, so that nothing is lost.
Can this help us here? Take the church situation once again. Polarisation has
occurred, and a split formed. Does one try to "patch it up"? The
answer must be "NO". It is far better for each group to go its own
way, whereby BOTH are preserved. Because God is the Lord of each group, He
loves each member as dearly. If we try to establish a false unity between
groups, then the outcome may even be destructive to the whole. The new wine AND
the old skin are lost in the exercise. Perhaps the urge to retain an apparent "unity"
was ill-conceived. In thinking that the Devil had created the split, it could
well have been that God was urging some of His children on in a different
direction.
In saying this, I am of course aware that our enemy is always at work causing
divisions, but a little more understanding may be necessary to perceive just
WHO is responsible for circumstances in church settings. Luther didn't want to
leave the Catholic church, but nevertheless he was forced out. Wesley never
wanted to leave the Anglican church but he was given no option eventually but
to meet outside the Anglican communion. It takes a bit of quiet reflection to
see the hand of the Lord at work, even in times of trouble, dissention,
polarisation, schism, and division. I hope that the above analysis may be
helpful to those who might have harboured ill-feelings towards others with whom
they can no longer meet for fellowship.