صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

above to be held by exceptional individuals of all creeds), that "the spirit of Christianity is so totally at variance with that of the world, that it is in vain to expect harmony between them." (Introd., p. 5.) What he means by the "unsanctified reason of man" (Ibid.) is not easy to comprehend. To ascribe evil opinions to anybody, is no congenial occupation, but we cannot help the suspicion that here enters our mind, and inclines us to fear that Mr. Hurst would establish a dualism in this world of ours, not unlike Manichæism,-a doctrine fatally pernicious, and calculated to dissever enlightened minds from all sympathy with revelation, on account of a falsely interpreted Christianity.

The antagonism supposed to exist between "the spirit of Christianity and that of the world," upon whose imaginary prevalence so many clergymen dilate, is more specious than real, and arises from a strange ignoring of history. It is indeed true, that Christ spoke of the "world," as if in opposition to him and his doctrine. But it was the world of his day, the unregenerate, uncivilized, unchristianized world; not as it is now, glorying in the enlightenment, freedom, and love, which have been introduced by Christian principles, if not by Christian men. Those who use the term as Mr. Hurst does in his book, transport themselves back to the days of Paganism, when the world was indeed corrupt, degraded by barbarous customs, and enslaved by idolatrous opinions; when human reason might be figuratively considered "unsanctified," because darkened by prejudice, which had usurped its throne over the actions of men and the life of society. If premises are changed, it is not logical to hold their conclusions unchangeable, and certainly the nineteenth century has a different aspect from that of the first. There is great injury inflicted upon the Christian cause, by the widely extended croaking over a supposed antagonism between its doctrines and the principles of the world, as the world presents itself to our eyes. Those who believe in such antipathy ought to abandon a world which they find irreconcilable with their profession, for they look upon Christianity as synonymous with monasticism, and have much in common with the troglodytes of ancient Egypt.

It is no wonder that Rationalism, against which Mr. Hurst tilts, makes head against revelation, supported on such a sandy foundation as that on which he would have us believe it erected. To say that "Rationalists" "were

possessed by the evil spirit" (Introd., p. 34), that "they corrupted nearly all the land (Germany) for several generations, until to-day the humblest peasant (from the land of Luther), who steps on our shores at Castle Garden, will stare in wonder, as you speak of a final judgment, the immortality of the soul, and the authenticity of the Scriptures" (Ib.), is not easily reconciled with what precedes, i. e. : "the great Coryphæi of Rationalism have sprung from the very bosom of the Church (Protestant), were educated under her maternal care, . . were in the eyes of the people its strongest pillars, the accredited spiritual guides of the land,... preaching in the churches which had been hallowed by the struggles and triumphs of the Reformation," (p. 27). Moreover, "German Protestantism cannot complain that this was the work of acknowledged foes; but is bound to confess, with. confusion of face, that it has been produced by her own sons." (Ib.)

Candour is a quality always commendable; but, although Mr. Hurst frankly admits these unpleasant facts, it is more than probable that he takes but a very partial and superficial view of the question, and does not go deep enough to discover the real cause of this eradication of Christianity in Protestant Germany. And first, the method of thought which he himself has adopted in placing Revelation above, if not contrary to human reason, is more pernicious, and has been more fatal to Christian mysteries than any Rationalistic efforts could possibly be. Any religious system that requires a man to believe in dogmas that are contrary to his reason, cannot have the Divinity for its author. God is the author of natural reason, and those mystics who suppose an All-wise Being dispensing a new revelation opposed or contradictory to the dictates of his previous work, are, in reality, guilty of the impious act by which his wisdom is assailed. Far more injurious to supernaturalism, are the irrational sophisms by which God is made to contradict himself, than the attacks of candid and avowed Rationalists.

If Christian revelation has a divine origin, its claims will be but feebly advanced by a method of reasoning that would destroy the harmony of creation. True Christianity does not require us to believe that human nature has become totally depraved, or that our reason, even in its unregenerate state, cannot discover by its own native powers some of the principal and essential doctrines un

derlying Christianity, and without which Christianity were no better than Buddhism, or any other system foisted upon the credulity of mankind by superstition and ignorance. Sound philosophy teaches that our reason is infallible in its own sphere, and, as an eminent writer has said: "Reason never leads us astray, but reasoning does." Our judgment errs because we are illogical. We accept false premises, or from true ones deduce, by defective method, false conclusions. This is not the fault of our reason in itself; it must be attributed to our want of accuracy, or to our prejudices, which so often sway our better judgment. From the Pagan philosophers this appears very satisfactorily. Aristotle reached by his natural reason some of the most sublime truths of revelation. The unity and eternity of God, his creatorship and his providence were clearly taught by him. St. Thomas follows up and elaborates, by the same rational process, the system of Christian belief and ethics, which has had such influence in determining the Christianity of the past six centuries. The great Stagyrite died praying: "Causa causarum, miserere mei" and it is said that in the Middle Ages-when human reason is falsely supposed to have been held in low esteem-so highly was he, its representative, honoured, that his name was inserted in a litany of saints, under the invocation, "Sancte Aristotele, ora pro nobis." In our day he would have but a slight chance of salvation amongst the depreciators of human nature, who pretend to mete out future happiness according to their whim. All this, however, we say in order to express very fully our belief, that those who are eager to ignore or depress reason in order to elevate revelation-who think they serve the supernatural by removing it entirely beyond, or making it appear incompatible with the natural, are really working for the demolition of both, proving what Christ said: "A man's enemies are those of his own household," and amongst whom we cannot help numbering Rev. Mr. Hurst, although his History of Rationalism is undoubtedly an interesting work.

Whether a member of one denomination can give an impartial account of his own creed, or take an unprejudiced view of another, is not very easy to decide. Certain it is that we but rarely meet with any religious work entirely free from undue bias; and so common is this belief, that we are always inclined to suspect the exposition which one man gives of his neighbour's different profession.

We know that Dr. Döllinger does not accord in every

thing with the opinions of the great body of his co-religionists in all their domestic questions. It is very true that the difference between them exists only respecting non-essential points-matters of discipline, political views and opinions regarding the policy of the Church in its human organization. There is no difference, we believe, between Catholics in matters of doctrine or faith; but there is an extensive field given over to opinion, and although there is not everywhere the same latitude enjoyed for the expression of divergent views, there is always the utmost freedom given to the interior assent to or dissent from propositions not of faith. And we always find the more highly educated members of the Catholic priesthood to be the most liberal in according to all the liberty which their Church does not deny them.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to detect in Dr. Döllinger's work any design to treat unfairly the question he examines. He appears to place a higher value upon truth, for truth's sake, than for the furtherance of party interest. This, because rare among sects, is all the more precious. In fact, his boldness and independence in combating opinions held by a majority of members in his own communion, is a guaranty of his fairness to other denominations. As an instance, we may cite his views of the temporal power of the Pope. He unhesitatingly declares his belief in the necessity of a change of policy in this matter, and intimates that a union of the two powers, temporal and spiritual, in one person, is an obstacle to the progress of the Church at the present day, and unequivocally demands a change in its programme in this respect.

In concluding his work he says: "We will not cling to what is transitory and accidental; we will not desire that any people shall be constrained to accept what we ourselves would not bear; we will not stand up for a false system of government which is, in fact, not more than forty-five years old, and the deficiencies of which the Pope himself has acknowledged, and which, in the course of that time, has generated nothing but d.scontent and revolt among the majority of the people. He who will support himself on such a staff, when the staff has already become rotten, must run the risk of falling to the ground"-(p. 474).

The man who expresses such sentiments in the face of the evident majority of his fellow-believers, thinking, or at least speaking, very strongly on the other side, must

have sufficient love of truth to give a candid examination to the doctrines of other denominations; unless we should believe with Gibbon, that the virtues of the clergy are more to be feared than their vices. Long as we have been acquainted with Protestant doctrines, and studious as we have been of Catholic principles, we have found much to learn concerning both in the writings of Döllinger. He does not fear the spirit of the present age, nor does he hesitate to trust in the future. Instead of combating the legitimate aspirations of human reason, he professes himself an ardent advocate of its claims in every sphere of science. It is true, indeed, that he has had opposition to his views strongly expressed by a certain party in the conservative church, to whose decrees he yields unswerving adhesion. This is, of course, but natural; and he who does not meet with contradiction may be generally put down as undeserving of approbation. He has never been censured by any authority in his communion, although he owed his escape from condemnation to the wise intervention of his friend, the learned Theiner, librarian of the Vatican.

Our age has many demands to make upon those who live and labour under its progressive inspiration. Although we cordially believe that human happiness and enlightenment have never been so far advanced in general as at the present day, there is nothing to which we look with a sense of more profound pleasure than the spirit of liberality and forbearance which is gradually pervading the religious world. This we cannot help ascribing to a more truthful appreciation of the real Christian spirit, and the more generally it announces itself from the pulpit, the brighter must grow the prospects of Christianity.

It is not easy to see the wisdom of some classes of clergymen whose chief aim is to decry the present age, and declaim against the unruly spirit manifest (to their eyes) in the impulses of the times. Many see nought but ruin in the goal to which humanity, in its longings after freedom and knowledge, at present tends. This, indeed, should not be surprising in those who look to the past as the best and purest epochs of Christian faith, who have no confidence in the present, and who dread the destinies of the future. To them the Christian light which illumined the darkness of barbarous times, and shed some lustre upon the dreariness of the Middle Ages, is now but flickering, soon, perhaps, to be totally extinguished. Many

« السابقةمتابعة »