صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

because Mr. Parker has a "brother's heart" towards the pagans whose happy "absolute religion" he cele

brates.

а

No; I shall not go to Mr. Parker to learn "charity," but to a very different class of men; men who do not regard gross idolatry and superstition as very good things in their way, and all in their turn of signal service to the world! Nor is it because Mr. Parker has "a brother's heart," that I smile at his easy charity; God forbid! but because the theories he patronizes have never stretched out yet a "brother's hands." That charity is but a cheap sort of charity which consists in talking and doing nothing; which sits at home by the blazing hearth, and in the happy homes of civilization, and will not even pay emissaries to do its work, if itself cannot; which calumniates the Christian, who is endeavoring to do for the world what the Deist never attempts to do, though he tells us he knows how it could be done much better than by preaching "an historical Christianity";-who says to the perishing heathen, “Be ye warmed, and be ye filled,” but neither warms nor fills them; or rather, perhaps, gives them the cold comfort, "My good savage friends, you look very wretched; but you do not want warming, and you do not want filling; - have you not the absolute religion? Take it amongst you, and my blessing go with you."

And, indeed, though infinitely different, why should any of these accommodating theories of Deism exact a more expensive charity? are they not all arguments for that same practical indolence, which, account for it how we will, has ever characterized Deism, and characterizes it still? What would a disciple of Mr. Parker, under the last Parkerian development, be prone to say, as he saw a band of idolaters at their dismal

rites on some savage shore? I think he would be apt to say, "Well, these savages are in a miserable plight, to be sure, in spite of the absolute religion; but why should I trouble myself about the matter? it will all come right, some day or other, I have no doubt, in another planet, or in one of the fixed stars." On the other hand, the Deist who thinks, with Mr. Newman, that immortality is most probably a delusion, would be tempted, perhaps, to say, "Why, yes; it will all come right some day, no doubt, but not for the reason Mr. Parker supposes; but because all these poor wretches will be knocked on the head together." Nevertheless, he might add, perhaps, "I may as well give them a word of exhortation too, on Mr. Newman's theory, as to what makes idolatry a crime. I hope," he might say, "my dear savage friends, that you take care not to worship idolatrously that curious I don't know his name, but we should call him in England three Guys rolled into one-with the delightfully open mouth, and the great goggle eyes; I hope you take care that it does not fall below your ideal of Divinity; I beseech you not to worship it as perfect and infinite, if you do not feel it to be so. Always take care, my friends, that your worship does not fall below your ideal! Bearing that in mind, I will lay no further burden upon you; so fare you well.”

monster

But this subject is worth pursuing a little further; and if I live, I will endeavor to show the Deist what are the conditions of his success, and what he must do, as well as say, before he can expect to make much impression on the world.

As to the dreaded alternative of Atheism, I have no fear of it. If the history of the world and of man teaches anything, it is that men will not be Atheists; and that, even if ATHEISM be the TRUTH, there is no

chance of its being established. Nor, on its own principles need it wonder at that; for if blind necessity or pure chance has framed the world, it has merely, as one would have expected, egregiously blundered; has so pleasantly constituted the universe and man, that man cannot but believe there is a God, even though there be none!

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

AND now for the paraded charges of " gross garbling" and "stealthy misrepresentation.”

There are two subjects on which Mr. Newman more particularly insists that I have done injustice to his sentiments. First, as respects his theory of the relations of Faith to Intellect, between which I have supposed him to wish to effect a "divorce "; and secondly, as respects the relation of the religious faculties. in man to the transmission, or external presentation to the mind, of religious truth. On the latter subject he gives an éclaircissement, not before it was needed, and still, I venture to say, requiring a further éclaircissement, as we shall presently see. But before proceeding to that, I will consider the charges of "garbling " and "misrepresentation," and distinctly show that I have been guilty of nothing of the kind. If I have misunderstood him, it is only just as others even many who are supposed more or less to sympathize with him have done; if we have all misunderstood him, it may be modestly conjectured that it was only because our author never understood himself.

[ocr errors]

First, then, Mr. Newman says: "This writer instils. into his readers the belief, that I make a fanatical separation between the intellectual and the spiritual, a 'divorce' between them, and concludes that I hold that Faith need not rest upon Truth, and I ought to be indifferent as to the worship of Jehovah or of the

image which fell down from Jupiter. He never quotes enough from me to let his reader understand what is meant by the words which he does quote."* I say with an unfaltering conscience, that no controvertist ever more honestly and sincerely sought to give his opponent's views, than I did Mr. Newman's, after the most diligent study of his rather obscure books; and that whether I succeeded or not in giving what he thought, I have certainly given what he expressed. It is quite true that I supposed Mr. Newman intended to "divorce" Faith and Intellect; and what else on earth could I suppose, in common even with those who were most leniently disposed towards him, from such sentiments as these? "ALL THE GROUNDS OF BELIEF PRO

POSED TO THE MERE UNDERSTANDING HAVE NOTHING

TO DO WITH FAITH AT ALL.” † "THE PROCESSES OF

THOUGHT HAVE NOTHING TO QUICKEN THE CONSCIENCE

OR AFFECT THE SOUL." "I "How then can the state of the soul be tested by the conclusion to which the intellect is led?" § I was compelled, I say, to take these passages, as everybody else took them, to mean what they obviously express. Again, was I not compelled to regard Mr. Newman's notions on the claims of Religious Truth as opposed to what he calls Sentiment - very lax, when I find him saying, that, though "he knew not how to avoid calling Atheism ‘a moral error,' yet we must not forget that it might be still a merely speculative error, which ought not to separate our hearts from any man." || Was I not driven to the same inferences from his definition of idolatry, which he frames in such a way that it may be doubted whether there are any idolaters in the world? that is,

*

Reply, p. 18.

‡ Soul, p. 245, 2d ed.

| Ibid.

† Soul, p. 223, 2d ed.

§ Soul, p. 30.

« السابقةمتابعة »