part cheerful and graceful, and its new gods certainly
more genial and indulgent than the old ones. And, in like manner, the religion of philosophy is more noble and more humane.than those primitive conceptions which were sufficient for early kings and warriors, But my answer to this objection is obvious: the progress of which man’s nature is capable is a development, not a destruction of its original state; it must subserve the elements from which it proceeds, in order to be a true development and not a per-
Ty Fl
ay sve Se on en eS ae 396 «= Inference and AS tin Religion, = version.* And thibas popular rituals ae in fact cubs serve and complete that nature with which man is = born. It is otherwise with the religion of so-called civilization; such religion does but contradict the religion of barbarism; and since this civilization itself is not a development of tman’s whole nature, but mainly of the “intellect, recognizing indeed the moral sense, but ignoring the conscience, no wonder that the religion in which it issues has no sympathy either with the hopes and fears of the awakened soul, or with those frightful presentiments which are expressed in the worship and traditions of the heathen. This artificial religion, then, has no place in the inquiry; first, because it comes of a one-sided progress of mind, and next, for the very reason that it contradicts informants which speak with greater authority than itself.
Now we come to the third natural informant on the subject of Religion; I mean the system and the course ofthe world. This established order of things, in which we find ourselves, if it has a Creator, must surely speak of His will in its broad outlines and its main issues. This principle being laid down as certain, when we come to apply it to things as they are, our first feeling is one of surprise and (I may say) of dismay, that His control of this living world is so indirect, and His action so obscure. This is the first lesson that we gain from the course of human affairs. What strikes the mind so forcibly and so painfully is, His absence (if I may so
_ speak) from His own world.‘ Itis a silence that speaks. It is as if others had got possession of His work. Why does not He, our Maker and Ruler, give us some immediate knowledge of Himself? Why does He not write His Moral Nature in large letters upon the face of history, and bring the blind, tumultuous rush of its events into a celestial, hierarchical order? Why does He not grant us in the structure of society at least so much of a revelation of Himself as the religions of the heathen attempt to supply? Why from the beginning of time has no one uniform steady light guided all families of the earth, and all individual men, how to please Him? Why is it possible without absurdity to deny His will, His attributes, His existence? Why does He not walk with us one by one, as He is said to have walked with His chosen men of old time? We both see and know each other; why, if we cannot have the sight of Him, have we not at least the knowledge? On the contrary, He is specially “a Hidden God;” and with our best efforts we can only glean from the surface of the world some faint and fragmentary views of Him. I see only a choice of alternatives in explanation of so critical a fact:—either there is no Creator, or He has disowned His creatures. Are then the dim shadows of His Presence in the affairs of men but a fancy of our own, or, on the other hand, has He hid His face and the light of His countenance, because we have in some special way dishonoured Him? My true informant, my burdened conscience, gives me * Vide “ Apologia,” p. 241.
bas By, gels 3: vip eh ont in Re eli igtion. a at once the true answer to each of these antagonis questions:—it pronounces without any misgiving that. God exists:—and it pronounces quite as surely that I am alienated from Ilim; that “ His hand is not short- | ened, but that our iniquities have divided between us — and our God.” Thus it solves the world’s mystery, and sees in that mystery only a confirmation of its own original teaching. Let us pass on to another great fact of experience, — bearing on Religion, which confirms this testimony both of conscience and of the forms of worship which prevail among mankind;—I mean, the amount of suffer- — ing, bodily and mental, which is our portion in this life. _ Not only is the Creator far off, but some being of malignant nature seems, as I have said, to have got hold of us, and to be making us his sport. Let us say there are a thousand millions of men on the earth at this — time; who can weigh and measure the aggregate of pain which this one generation has endured and will endure from birth to death? ‘Then add to this all the pain which has fallen and will fall upon our race — through centuries past and tocome. Is there not then some great gulf fixed between us and the good God? Here again the testimony of the system of nature is © more than corroborated by those popular traditions — about the unseen state, which are found in mythologies _ and superstitions, ancient and modern; for those tra-_
’ ditions speak, not only of present misery, but of pain —. and evil hereafter, and even without end. But this dreadful addition is not neces sary for the conclusion Me which I am here wishing ‘to draw. The real mystery
4 is, not that evil should never have an end, but that it should ever have had a beginning. Even a universat restitution could not undo what had been, or account for evil being the necessary condition of good. How — are we to explain it, the existence of God being taken for granted, except by saying that another will, besides His, has had a part in the disposition of His work, that there is a quarrel without remedy, a chronic alienation, between God and man?
I have implied that the laws on which this world is governed do not go so far as to prove that evil will never die out of the creation; nevertheless, they look in that direction. No experience indeed of life can assure us about the future, but it can and does give us means of conjecturing what is likely to be; and those conjectures coincide with our natural forebodings. Experience enables us to ascertain the moral constitution of man, and thereby to presage his future from his present. It teaches us, first, that -he is not suffcient for his own happiness, but is dependent upon the sensible objects which surround him, and that these he cannot take with him when he leaves the world;
_ secondly, that disobedience to his sense of right is even by itself misery, and that he carries that misery about him, wherever he is, though no divine retribution fol- _ lowed upon it; and thirdly, that he- cannot change his _ nature and his habits by wishing, but is simply himself, and will ever be himself and what he now is, wherever he is, as long as he contimain to be,—or at least that pain has no natural tendency to make him other than he is, and that the longer he lives, the more difficult he is to
- oor eee and A sont a on.
change. How can we meet thodewiet irrational anti cl pations, except by shutting our eyes, turning away from them, and saying that we have no call, no right, to think — of them at present, or to make ourselves miserable — about what is not certain, and may be not true?”
Such is the severe aspect of Natural Religion: also it is the most prominent aspect, because the multitude — of men follow their own likings and wills, and not the 1 decisions of their sense of right and wrong. To them — Religion is a mere yoke, as Lucretius describes it; not a satisfaction or refuge, but a terror and a superstition. — However, I must not for an instant be supposed to — mean, that this is its only, its chief, or its legitimate — aspect. All Religion, so far as it is genuine, is a blessing, Natural as well as Revealed. I have insisted on its severe aspect in the first place, because, from the circumstances of human nature, though not by the — fault of Religion, such is the shape in which we first encounter it. Its large and deep foundation is the sense of sin and guilt, and without this sense there is” for man, as he is, no genuine religion. Otherwise, it 4 is but counterfeit and hollow; and that is the reason > why this so-called religion of civilization and philoso- — phy is so great a mockery. However, true as this — judgment is which I pass on philosophical religion, | and troubled as are the existing relations between God and man, as both the voice of mankind and the facts” of Divine Government testify, equally true are other general laws which govern those relations, and they speak another language, and compensate for what is § Vide “ Callista,” ch. xix..
_ stern in the teaching of nature, reiibsout! tending to _ deny that sternness.
The first of these laws, relieving the aspect of Natural Religion, is the very fact that religious beliefs and institutions, of some kind or other, are of sech general acceptance in all times and places. Why should men subject themselves to the tyranny which Lucretius denounces, unless they had either experience or hope of benefits to themselves by so doing? Though it be mere hope of benefits, that alone is a great alleviation of the gloom and misery which their religious rites presuppose or occasion; for thereby they have a pros- _ pect, more or less clear, of some happier state in reserve _ for them, or at least the chances of it. If they simply despaired of their fortunes, they would not care about religion. And hope of future good, as we know, sweetens all suffering.
Moreover, they have an earnest of that future in the real and recurring blessings of life, the enjoyment of the gifts of the earth, and of domestic affection and social intercourse, which is sufficient to touch and to
_ subdue even the most guilty of men in his better moments, reminding him that he is not utterly cast off by Him whom nevertheless he is not given to know. Or, in the Apostle’s words, though the Creator once “ suffered all nations to walk in their own ways,” still, “He left not Himself without testimony, doing good from heaven, giving rains and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.”
Nor ‘are these blessings of physical nature the only |
_ tokens in the Divine System, which in that heathen pd
Bi er te “Tnferenes See ‘Aclons in Re gion, "a time, and indeed in every age, bring home to our ox perience the fact of a Good God, in spite of the tamale and confusion of the world. It is possible to give an — interpretation to the course of things, by which every event or occurrence in its order becomes providential: — and though that interpretation does not hold good un- 4 less the world is contemplated from a particular point _ of view, in one given aspect, and with certain inward experiences, and personal first principles and judgments, yet these may be fairly pronounced to be com- — mon conditions of human thought, that is, till they are — 4 wilfully or accidentally lost; and they issue in fact, in leading the great majority of men to recognize the Hand of unseen power, directing in mercy or in judgment the physical and moral system. In the prominent events of the world, past and contemporary, — the fate, evil or happy, of great men, the rise and fall _ of states, popular revolutions, decisive battles, the © migration of races, the replenishing of the earth, earth- quakes and pestilences, critical discoveries and inventions, the history of philosophy, the advancement of knowledge, in these the spontaneous piety of the — human mind discerns a Divine Supervision. Nay, — there is a general feeling, originating directly in the — workings of conscience, that a similar governance is extended over the persons of individuals, who thereby — both fulfil the purposes and receive the just recom- — penses of an Omnipotent Providence. Good to the — good, and evil to the evil, is instinctively felt to wend even from what we see, amid whatever obscurity dad) confusion, the universal rule of God’s dealings with us re
EF ence come the great proverbs, indigenous in both _ Christian and heathen nations, that punishment is sure, though slow, that murder will out, that treason never prospers, that pride will have a fall, that honesty - is the best policy, and that curses fall on the heads of — those who utter them. ‘To the unsophisticated apprehension of the many, the successive passages of life, social or political, are so many miracles, if that is to be accounted miraculous which brings before them the _ immediate Divine Presence; and should it be objected that this is an illogical exercise of reason, I answer, that since it actually brings them toa right conclusion, - and was intended to bring them to it, if logic finds fault with it, so much the worse for logic. Again, prayer is essential to religion, and, where _ prayer is, there is a natural relief and solace in all trouble, great or ordinary: now prayer is not less general in mankind at large than is faith in Proviq dence. It has ever been in use, both as a personal and _ as a social practice. Here again, if, in order to deter- _ mine what the Religion of Nature is, we may justly __ have recourse to the spontaneous acts and proceedings _ of our race, as viewed on a large ‘field, we may safely _ say that prayer, as well as hope, is a constituent of man’s religion. Nor is it a fair objection to this argument, to say that such prayers and rites as have _ obtained in various places and times, are in their character, object, and scope inconsistent with each other; because their sontrarieties do not come intothe ideaof = 1 ‘religion, as such, at all, and the very fact of their dis- - ene destr oys their right to be taken into account, +5 re festo of a multitude meeting together and pledging — ear she ee =,t Be iaiag er a 404 Taleoute uf Assent in Re ‘gion. iS ":
so far as they are discordant; for ek is not universal has no claim to be considered natural, right, or of f divine origin. Thus we may determine prayer to bat part of Natural Religion, from such instances of the 7 usage as are supplied by the priests of Baal and by dancing Dervishes, without therefore including in our notions of prayer the frantic excesses of the one, or. the artistic spinning of the other, or sanctioning their respective objects of belief, Baal or Mahomet. a As prayer is the voice of man to God, so Revelation — J is the voice of God to man. Accordingly, it is another 7 alleviation of the darkness and distress which weigh — upon the religions of the world, that in one way or _ other such religions are founded on some idea of ex~ — press revelation, coming from the unseen agents whose — anger they deprecate; nay, that the very rites and — observances, by which they hope to gain the favour of i) these beings, are by these beings themselves commu- — nicated and appointed. ‘The Religion of Nature has not — been a deduction of reason, or the joint, voluntary mani- themselves to each other, as men move resolutions © now for some political or social purpose, but it has been _ a tradition or an interposition vouchsafed toa people — from above. ‘To such an interposition men even as- q eribed their civil polity or citizenship, which did not — originate in any plebiscite, but in dii minores or heroes, — and was inaugurated with portents or palladia, and pro- — tected and prospered by oracles and auguries, Hereis an evidence, too, how congenial the notion ofa ie tion is to the human mind, so that the expectation o
Cates * he a as Bs ay hag ne eon OMalarek Religion, aN 405 ae it may truly be considered an integral part of N ataral ‘a Religion. i) Among the observances imposed by these professed revelations, none is more remarkable, or more general, than the rite of sacrifice, in which guilt was removed or blessing gained by an offering, which availed instead of the merits of the offerer. This, too, as well as the notion of divine interpositions, may be considered almost an integral part of the Religion of Nature, and an alleviation of its gloom. But it does not stand by itself; I have already spoken of the doctrine of atonement, under which it falls, and which, if what is universal is natural, enters into the idea of religious service. And what the nature of man suggests, the providential system of the world sanctions by enforcing. It is the law, or the permission, given to our whole race, to use the Apostle’s words, to “ bear one another’s burdens;” and this, as I said when on the subject of Atonement,
_ is quite consistent with his antithesis that “every one must bear his own burden.” The final burden of responsibility when we are called to judgment is our own; but among the media by which we are prepared for that judgment are the exertions and pains taken in our behalf by others. On this vicarious principle, by which we appropriate to ourselves what others do for us, the whole structure of society is raised. Parents work and endure pain, that their children may prosper; children suffer for the sin of their
_ parents, who have died before it bore fruit. “Deli- rant reges, plectuntur Achivi.”’ Sometimes it is a_
_ punishment which is earned by the husband falls upon 1 the wife; the benefits in which all classes partake ar wrought out by the unhealthy or dangerous toil of the few. Soldiers endure wounds and death for those — who sit at home; and ministers of state fall victims to their zeal for their countrymen, who do little else than criticize their actions. And so in some measure — or way this law embraces all of us. We all suffer for 4 each other, and gain by each other’s sufferings; for — man never stands alone here, though he will stand by q himself one day hereafter; but here he is a social — being, and goes forward to his long home as one of a large company.
Butler, it need scarcely be said, is the great master — of this doctrine, as it is brought out in the system of nature. In answer to the objection to the Christian doctrine of satisfaction, that it “represents God as 4 indifferent whether He punishes the innocent or the 7 guilty,” he observes that “the world is a constitution F or system, whose parts have a mutual reference to — each other; and that there is a scheme of things E gradually carrying on, called the course of nature, to — the carrying on of which God has appointed us, in — various ways, to contribute. And in the daily course of natural providence, it is appointed that innocent ‘people should suffer for the faults of the guilty. © Finally, indeed and upon the whole, every one shall — receive according to his personal deserts; but during — the progress, and, for ought we know, even in order _ to the completion of this moral scheme, vicarious —
_ punishments may be fit, and absolntelyy neceanins
"We see in what variety of ways one person’s sufferings ©
DF ponitibats to the relief of another; and being familiarized to it, men are not shocked with it. So the reason ee tr, ‘eer “Watural Religion ea | AO of their insisting on objections against the [doctrine | of] satisfaction is, either that they do not consider _ God’s settled and uniform appointments as His ap- -pointments at all; or else they forget that vicarious punishment is a providential appointment of every day’s experience.” ® I will but add, that, since all human suffering is in its last resolution the punishment of sin, and punishment implies a Judge and a rule of justice, he who undergoes the punishment of another in his stead may be said in a certain sense to satisfy the claims of justice towards that other in his own person, - One coneluding remark has to be madehere. Inall sacrifices it was specially required that the thing offered should be something rare, and unblemished; and in like manner in all atonements and all satisfactions, not only - was the innocent taken for the guilty, but it was a point ‘of special importance that the victim should be spotless, and the more manifest that spotlessness, the more efficacious was the sacrifice. This leads me to a last principle which I shall notice as proper to Natural Religion, and as lightening the prophecies of evil in which it is founded; I mean the doctrine of meritorious intercession. The man in the Gospel did but speak for the | human race everywhere, when he said, “God heareth _ not sinners; but if a man be a worshipper of God, and doth His will, him He heareth.’ Hence every _ religion has had its eminent devotees, exalted above § «* Analogy,” Pt. ii. ch. 5 (abridged).
the body of the people, mortified men, iebught nearer — to the Source of good by austerities, self-inflictions, — and prayer, who have influence with Him, and extend — a shelter and gain blessings for those who become their clients. A belief like this has been, of course, — attended by numberless superstitions; but those super- _ stitions vary with times and places, and the belief itself in the mediatorial power of the good and holy has been one and the same everywhere. Nor is this — belief an idea of past times only or of heathen countries. It is one of the most natural visions of the — young and innocent. And all of us, the more keenly 3 we feel our own distance from holy persons, the more — are we drawn near to them, as if forgetting that 4 distance, and proud of them because they are so un- — like ourselves, as being specimens of what our nature © may be, and with some vague hope that we, their — relations by blood, may profit in our own persons by their holiness. | Such, then, in outline is that system of natural beliefs and sentiments, which, though true and divine, is still possible to us independently of Revelation, and is the preparation for it; though in Christians themselves it cannot really be separated from their Christianity, and never is possessed in its higher forms in any people. without some portion of those inward aids which — | Christianity imparts to us, and those endemic traditions which have their first origin in a paradisiacal —) | illumination..
Be iacrely \Revaadeal ROH
_ In determining, as above, the main features of Natural
Religion, and distinguishing it from the religion of philosophy or civilization, I may be accused of having _ taken a course of my own, for which I have no sufficient warrant. Such an accusation does not give me much concern. Every one who thinks on these subjects takes
~ acourse of his own, though it will also happen to be the course which others take besides himself. The minds of many separately bear them forward in the same direction, and they are confirmed in it by each other. This I consider to be my own case; if I have mis-stated or omitted notorious facts in my account of Natural Religion, if I have contradicted or disregarded anything which He who speaks through my conscience has told us all directly from Heaven, then indeed I have acted _ unjustifiably and have something to unsay; but, if I have done no more than view the notorious facts of the case in the medium of my primary mental experiences,
_under the aspects which they spontaneously present to
_ me, and with the aid of my best illative sense, I only
_ do on one side of the question what those who think © differently do on the other. As they start with one a ‘ hg aad r:
410 53) sy and ‘A soendie m Religion. a “S set of first principles, I start with another. I ga 6 notice just now that I should offer my own witness in the matter in question; though of course it would — not be worth while my offering it, unless what I felt myself agreed with what is felt by hundreds and thou- — sands besides me, as I am sure it does, whatever be the ~ measure, more or less, of their explicit recognition of it. In thus speaking of Natural Religion as in one sense — a matter of private judgment, and that with a view of — proceeding from it to the proof of Christianity, I seem — to give up the intention of demonstrating either. Certainly I do; not that I deny that demonstration is — possible. Truth certainly, as such, rests upon grounds q intrinsically and objectively and abstractedly demon- — strative, but it does not follow from this that the. arguments producible in its favour are unanswerable 4 and irresistible. These latter epithets are relative, and, bear upon matters of fact; arguments in themselves — ought to do, what perhaps inthe particular casetheycan- — not do. The fact of revelation is in itself demonstrably — true, but it is not therefore true irresistibly; else, how { comes it to be resisted? There is avast distance between: what it is in itself, and what it is to us. Light is a quality of matter, as truth is of Christianity; but light — is not recognized by the blind, and there are those who do not recognize truth, from the fault, not of truth, but — of themselves, I cannot convert men, when I ask for — assumptions which they refuse to grant to me; and without assumptions no one can prove any hing about anything. | Ob lam suspicious then of saiemeistin demonstrations i in a a Pree ee tee re. Rot ors question of concrete fact, in a discussion aiden fallible men. However, let those demonstrate who have the gift; “unusquisque in suo sensu abundet.” For = me, it is more congenial to my own judgment to at- § tempt to prove Christianity in the same informal way _ inwhich I can prove for certain that I have been born - into this world, and that I shall die out of it. It is, ‘pleasant to my own feelings to follow a theological; _ writer, such as Amort, who has dedicated to the great Pope, Benedict XIV., what he calls “a new, modest, and easy way of demonstrating the Catholic Religion.”
In this work he adopts the argument merely of the _ greater probability; I prefer to rely on that of an | accumulation of various probabilities; but we both hold (that is, I hold with him), that from probabilities we may construct legitimate proof, sufficient for certitude. I follow him in holding, that, since a Good
1 “Scopus operis est, planiorem Protestantibus aperire viam ad veram Eeelesiam. Cim enim hactenus Polemici nostri insudarint toti in _ demonstrandis singulis Religionis Catholice articulis, in id ego unum incumbo, ut hee triaevincam. Primo: Articulos fundamentales, Religionis Catholice esse evidenter credibiliores oppositis, &c. &e..... ~ Demonstratio autem hujus nove modestz, ac facilis view, qua ex articulis - fundamentalibus solim probe ubilioribus adstruitur summa Religionis _ eertitudo, hee est: Deus, ciim sit sapiens ac providus, tenetur, Reli- _ gionem & se revelatam reddere evidenter credibiliorem religionibus fualsis, _Twprudenter enim vellet, suam Religionem ab hominibus recipi, nisi) eam redderet evidenter credibiliorem religionibus ceteris. Ergo illa, - religio, que est evidenter credibilior ceteris, est ipsissima religio a Deo & _revelata, adeoque certissimé vera, seu demonstrata. Atqui, &e..... - Motivem aggrediendi novam hanc, modestam, ac facilem viam illud -precipuum est, quod observem, Protestantium plurimos post innumeros; -concertationum fluctus, in iis tandem consedisse syrtibus, ut credant, nullam dari religionem undequaque demonstratam, &c.... Ratiociniis nique opponunt ratiocinia; prajudiciis prejudicia ex majoribus we pe? Ke A a ae Ty v9 ge ek ee ’
for those ends for which He has pita them; and that a as in mathematics we are justified by the dictate of nature in withholding our assent from a conclusion of | which we have not yet a strict logical demonstration, so by a like dictate we are not justified, in the case of concrete reasoning and especially of religious inquiry, in waiting till such logical demonstration is ours, bat on the contrary are bound in conscience to seek truth and to look for certainty by modes of proof, which, when reduced to the shape of formal propositions, fail to satisfy the severe requisitions of science.’ y
Here then at once is one momentous doctrine or principle, which enters into my own reasoning, and which another ignores, viz. the providence and intention of God; and of course there are other principles, explicit or implicit, which are in like circumstances. It is not wonderful then, that, while I can prove Christianity —
2 “ Docet naturalis ratio, Deum, ex ips4 natura bonitatis ac providentia. suse, si velit in mundo habere religionem puram, eamque instituere ac_ couservare usque in finem mundi, teneri ad eam religionem reddendam > | evidenter credibiliorem ac verisimiliorem ceteris, kc. &.... « Ex hoe | sequitur ulterius; certitudinem moralem de vera Ecclesia elevari posse _ ad certitudinem metaphysicam, si homo advertat, certitudinem moralem | absoluté fallibilem substare in materia religionis circa ejus constitutiva — fundamentalia speciali providentia divine, preservatrici ab omni errore. — -. + + Itaque homo semel ex serie historici actorum perductus ad moralem certitudinem de auctore, fundatione, propagatione, et con. tinuatione Ecclesia Christian, per reflexionem ad existentiam certiogg main providentia diving in materia religionis, 4 priori lumine natura certitudine metaphysica notam, eo ipso eadem infallibili certituding | intelliget, argumenta de auctore,” &c.—Amort. Ethica Canes ui a BiPat, ‘ OM Dens |
_ divine to my own satisfaction, I shall not be able to force it upon any one else. Maultitudes indeed I ought to succeed in persuading of its truth without any force at all, because they and I start from the same princi- _ ples, and what is a proof to me is a proof to them; but _ if any one starts from any other principles but ours, I have not the power to change his principles, or the conclusion which he draws from them, any more than I can make a crooked man straight. Whether his mind will ever grow straight, whether I can do anything towards its becoming straight, whether he is not responsible, _responsible to his Maker, for being mentally crooked, _ is another matter; still the fact remains, that, in any inquiry about things in the concrete, men differ from each other, not so much in the soundness of their - reasoning as in the principles which govern its exercise, that those principles are of a personal character, that where there is no common measure of minds, there is no common measure of arguments, and that the _ validity of proof is determined, not by any scientific _ test, but by the illative sense. _ Accordingly, instead of saying that the truths of Revelation depend on those of Natural Religion, it is more pertinent to say that belief in revealed truths _ depends on belief in natural. Belief isa state of mind; belief generates belief; states of mind correspond to each other; the habits of thought and the reasonings _ which lead us on toa higher state of belief than our present, are the very same which we already possess in _ connexion with the lower state. Those Jews became a Christians i in Apostolic times: who were already what ~ may be called crypto-Christians; and those Christie ns in this day remain Christian only in name, and (if it so i, happen) at length fall away, who are nothing deeper or better than men of the world, savants, literary men, y or politicians. a
That a special preparation of mind is required for; each separate department of inquiry and discussion — (excepting, of course, that of abstract science) is strongly insisted upon in well-known passages of the Nicomachean ethics. Speaking of the variations which are found in the logical perfection of proof in various subject-matters, Aristotle says, “A well- ~ educated man will expect exactness in every class of / subject, according as the nature of the thing admits; a for it is much the same mistake to put up with a ‘ mathematician using probabilities, and to require — demonstration of an orator. Each man judges skillfully in those things about which he is well-informed; 4 it is of these that he is a good judge; viz. he, in each © subject-matier, is a judge, who is well-educated in that — subject-matter, and he is in an absolute sense a ‘adgel | who is in all of them well-educated.” Again: “Young — men come to be mathematicians and the like, but a 4 cannot possess practical judgment; for this talent is 4 employed upon individual facts, and these are learned — only by experience; and a youth has not experience, — for experience is only gained by a course of years.: And so, again, it would appear that a boy may be a mathematician, but not a philosopher, or learned in physics, and for this reason,—because the one study rs deals with abstractions, while the other Eg par but in the former they know what it is that they are | handling.”
_. These words of a heathen philosopher, laying down _ broad principles about all knowledge, express a general rule, which in Scripture is applied authoritatively to the _ case of revealed knowledge in particular;—and that not once or twice only, but continually, as is notorious.
_ For instance:—“I have understood,” says the Psalmist,
_ more than all my teachers, because Thy testimonies are my meditation.” And so our Lord: “He that hath ears, let him hear.” “If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine.” And “ He that _is of God, heareth the words of God.” Thus too the Angels at tlie Nativity announce “ Peace to men of - good will.” And we read in the Acts of the Apostles of ‘Lydia, whose heart the Lord opened to attend to those things which were said by Paul.” And - we are told on another occasion, that “as many as were ordained,” or disposed by God, “ to life everlasting, believed”? And St. John tells us, “He that _ knoweth God, heareth us; he that is not of God, heareth us not; by this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.”
Relying then on these authorities, human and Divine, _ Ihave no scruple in beginning the review I shall take of Christianity by professing to consult for those only _ whose minds are properly prepared for it; and by being
“their priniplen from experience, andi in the latter sub-. _ jects youths do not give assent, but make assertions, oe 5 Piet anit Assent Mm Cibbion: ae prepared, I mean to denote those who are imbued with the religious opinions and sentiments which I have identified with Natural Religion. I do not address — myself to those, who in moral evil and physical see nothing more than imperfections of a parallel nature; who consider that the difference in gravity between — the two is one of degree only, not of kind; that moral’ — evil is merely the offspring of physical, dnd that as we — remove the latter so we inevitably remove the former; _ that there is a progress of the human race which tends — to the annihilation of moral evil; that knowledge is virtue, and vice is ignorance; that sin is a bugbear, ‘ not a reality; that the Creator does not punish except — in the sense of correcting; that vengeance in Him: would of necessity be vindictiveness; that all that we — know of Him, be it much or little, is through the laws _ of nature; that miracles are impossible; that prayerto — Him isa superstition; that the fear of Him is unmanly; _ that sorrow for sin is slavish and abject; that the only — intelligible worship of Him is to act well our part inthe world, and the only sensible repentance to do better in future; that if we do our duties in this life, we may take our chance for the next; and that: it is of no use perplexing our minds about the future state, — for it is all a matter of guess. These opinions characterize a civilized age; and if I say that I will not — argue about Christianity with men who hold them, I do so, not as claiming any right to be impatient or — peremptory with any one, but because it is plainly: absurd to attempt to prove a second beopoweing to those who do not admit the first. | | J “i
MM, er a Fe oe * 4 Paes: es er a ea ee \) aes ore Revealed Re I assume then that the above system of opinion is simply false, inasmuch as it contradicts the primary _ teachings of nature in the human race, wherever a religion is found and its workings can be ascertained. -Tassume the presence of God in our conscience, and the universal experience, as keen as our experience of bodily pain, of what we call a sense of sin or guilt. This sense of sin, as of something not only evil in itself, but an affront to the good God, is chiefly felt as regards one or other of three violations of His law. He Himself is Sanctity, Truth, and Love; and the three offences against His Majesty are impurity, inveracity, and cruelty All men are not distressed at these offences alike; but the piercing pain and sharp remorse which one or other inflicts upon the mind, till habituated to them, brings home to it the notion of what sin is, and is the vivid type and representative of its intrinsic hatefulness. Starting from these elements, we may determine without difficulty the class of sentiments, intellectual and moral, which constitute the formal preparation for entering upon what are called the Evidences of Christianity. These evidences, then, presuppose a beliefand perception __.of the Divine Presence, a recognition of His attributes and an admiration of His Person viewed under them; a conviction of the worth of the soul and of the reality and momentousness of the unseen world, an understanding that, in proportion as we partake in our own persons of the attributes which we admire in Him, we are dear to _ Him; aconsciousnesson thecontrary that we are far from exemplifying them, a consequent insight into our guilt ‘ and misery, an eager hope of reconciliation to Him, a desire to know and to love Him, and a sensitive looking. - out in all that happens, whether in the course of nature — or of human life, for tokens, if such there be, of His | bestowing on us what we so greatly need. These are | specimens of the state of mind for which I stipulate in those who would inquire into the truth of Christianity; — and my warrant fér so definite a stipulation lies in the ~ teaching, as I have described it, of conscience and the | moral sense, in the testimony of those religious rites _ which have ever prevailed in all parts of the world, and in the character and conduct of those who have commonly been selected by the popular instinct as the — special favourites of Heaven.
I have appealed to the popular ideas on the subject 7 of religion, and to the objects of popular admiration and praise, as illustrating my account of the preparation of mind which is necessary for the inquirer into — Christianity. Here an obvious objection occurs, in noticing which I shall be advanced one step farther in the work which I have undertaken.
It may be urged, then, that no appeal will avail me, — which is made to religions so notoriously immoral as — those of paganism; nor indeed can it be made without an explanation. Certainly, as regards ethical teaching, ~ various religions, which have been popular in the world, have not supplied any; and in the corrupt state in which they appear in history, they are little better than schools — of imposture, cruelty, and impurity. Their objects of © worship were immoral as well as false, and their founders —
_ and heroes have been in keeping with their gods, This is undeniable, but it does not destroy the use that may be made of their testimony. There is a better side of their teaching; purity has often been held in reverence, if not practised; ascetics have been in honour; hospi- tality has been a sacred duty; and dishonesty and injustice have been under a ban. Here then, as before, I take our natural perception of right and wrong as the standard for determining the characteristics of Natural Religion, and I use the religious rites and traditions which are actually found in the world, only so far as they agree with our moral sense.
This leads me to lay down the general principle, which
_ Lhave all along implied:—that no religion is from God which contradicts our sense of right and wrong. Doubt-
3 less; but at the same time we ought to be quite sure
_ that, in a particular case which is before us, we have satisfactorily ascertained what the dicates of our moral
' nature are, and that we apply them rightly, and whether the applying them or not comes into question at all. The precepts of a religion certainly may be absolutely immoral; a religion which simply commanded us to lie, orto have a community of wives, would ipso facto forfeit all claim to a divine origin. Jupiter and Neptune, as represented in the classical mythology, are evil spirits, and nothing can make them otherwise. And I should in like manner repudiate a theology which taught that _ men were created in ofder to be wicked and wretched. _ Ialluded just now to those who consider the doctrine of retributive punishment, or of divine vengeance, to be incompatible with the true religion; but I do not see ( zEe2; |;. +,, =
_ how they can maintain their ground. In order to do so, they have first to prove that an act of vengeance must, as such, be a sin in our own instance; but even E this is far from clear. Anger and indignation against — cruelty and injustice, resentment of injuries, desire that — the false, the ungrateful, and the depraved should meet — with punishment, fhese, if not in themselves virtuous feelings, are at least not vicious; but, first from the certainty that, if habitual, it will run into excess and become sin, and next because the office of punishment has not been committed to us, and further because it is a feeling unsuitable to those who are themselves so laden withim- — perfection and guilt, therefore vengeance, in itself allow- — able, is forbidden to us. These exceptions do not hold — in the case of a perfect being, and certainly not in the instance of the Supreme Judge. Moreover, we see that — even men on earth have different duties, according to — their personal qualifications and their positions in the — community. The rule of morals is the same for all; and yet, notwithstanding, what is right in one is not necessarily right in another. What would be acrime ina ~ private man to do, isa crime ina magistrate not to 7 have done: still wider is the difference between man — and his Maker. Nor must it be forgotten, that, as I have observed above, retributive justice is the very attribute under which God is primarily brought before us in the teachings of our natural conscience. }
And further, we cannot determine the character of — particular actions, till we have the whole case before us out of which they arise; unless, indeed, they are in themselves distinctively vicious. We all feel the force
Revealed Religion. = =—— 421 of the maxim, “ Audialteram partem.” It is difficult to trace the path and to determine the scope of Divine
_ Providence. We read of a day when the Almighty will - condescend to place His actions in their completeness before His creatures, and “ will overcome when He is judged.” If, till then, we feel it to be a duty to suspend - our judgment concerning certain of His actions or precepts, we do no more than what we do every day in the case of an earthly friend or enemy, whose conduct in some point requires explanation. It surely is not too much to expect of us that we should act with parallel caution, and be “‘memores conditicnis nostree” as regards _ the acts of our Creator. There is a poem of Parnell’s _ which strikingly brings home to us how differently the divine appointments will look in the light of day, from _ what they appear to be in our present twilight. An Angel, in disguise of a man, steals a golden cup, strangles an infant, and throws a guide into the stream, _ and then explains to his horrified companion, that acts which would be enormities in man, are in hin, as God’s minister, deeds of merciful correction or of _ retribution. Moreover, when we are about to pass judgment on the
7 dealings of Providence with other men, we shall do well.
to consider first His dealings with ourselves. We cannot know about others, about ourselves we do know something; and we know that He has ever been good _ to us,and not severe. Is it not wise to argue from what we actually know to what we do not know? It may _ turn out in the day of account, that unforgiven souls, _ while “ane His laws with injustice in the case of oe a) ne st ee one ils. y
422, Inference anit Assent in Re Kelip on.
others, may be unable to find fault with His dealings severally towards themselves. ah As to those various religions which, together with © Christianity, teach the doctrine of eternal punishment, — here again we ought, before we judge, tounderstand, not only the whole state of the case, but what is meant by the doctrine itself.» Eternity, or endlessness, is in itself — mainly a negative idea, though the idea of suffering is positive. Its fearful force, as an element of future — punishment, lies in what it excludes; it means never — any change of state, no annihilation or restoration; — but what, considered positively, it adds to suffering, — we do not know. For what we know, the suffering — of one moment may in itself have no bearing, or but | a partial bearing, on the suffering of the next; and thus, as far as its intensity is concerned, it may vary with every lost soul. This may beso, unless we assume that the suffering is necessarily attended by a con- — sciousness of duration and succession, by a present ima- _ gination of its past and its future, by a sustained power — of realizing its continuity.’ As I have aiready said, the — great mystery is,notthat evil has no end, but that it had — a beginning. But I submit the whole subject to the — ‘Theological School. a 3.
One of the most important effects of Natural Religion on the mind, in preparation for Revealed, is the antici- —
3 “De hac damnatorum saltem hominum respiratione, nihil adhuc certi / decretum est ab Ecclesia Catholic&é: ut propterea non temeré, tanquam absurda, sit explodenda sanctissimorum Patrum hee opinio: quamvis & communi sensu Catholicorum hoc tempore sit aliena.’””—Petavius de Angelis, fin. Vide Note Ill. a