A^<

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

"%>.

^^<Sf

11.25

tuns, Hi

1*0

•;<

U 116

Photographic

Sdences
Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREIT

WEBSTER, N.Y. I45S0

(716) 872-4S03

CIHM
Microfiche
Series
(Monographs)

JCIMH

Collection de
microfiches
(monographles)

Canadian Inttituta for Historical IMicroraproductions / Institut Canadian da microraproductions historiquas

Aft

Ttchnical and Bibliographic Notts / NoMt tachntquci et bibliographiquM

Th«

toti

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original
copy available for filming. Features of this copy which
may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any
of the images in the reproduction, or which may
significantly change the usual method of filming, are
checked below.

D
D

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagte

Covers restored aitd/or laminated/
Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculte

□ Cover title missing/
Le

titre de couverture manque

Coloured maps/

Caites giographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Relie avec d'autres documents

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meillcur exemplaire qu'ii
lui a M possible de se procurer. Les details de cet
exemplaire qui sont peut4tre uniques du point de vue
bibliographique, qui pcuvent modifier una image
reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification
dans la mithode normale de f ilmage sont indiqufe
ci-dessous.

□ Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

□ Pages damaged/
Pages endommagits

□ Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurtes et/ou pelliculies

Pages discoloured, stained or foxad/
Pages dteolories, tachet^es ou piquees

□ Pages detached/
Pages ttixachits

0Showthrough/
Transparence

□ Quality of print varies/
Qualite inigale de I 'impression

□ Continuous pagination/
Pagination continue

The

pOM
OftI

filml

Orig
begi
thai
sior^
otha
first
■ion
or ill

The
shall
TINl
whic

Map
diffe
antir
bagii
right
raqu
mati

□ Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serrte peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distorsion le long de ia marge int^ieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may appear
within the text. Whenever possible, these have
been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas M f ilmtes.

Additional comments;/
Commentaires supplementaires:

□ Includes index(es)/
Comprend un (des) index

Title on header taken from:/
Le titre de I'sn-tCte provient:

vraison

□ Title page of issue/
Page de titre de la li

□ Caption of issue/
Titre de depart de la livraison

□ Masthead/
Generique (periodiques) de la livraison

This item is filmed at ihe reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est f ilme au taux de rMuction indiqu^ ci-dessous.

■•9X.

1BX

22X

26X

\2X

1CX

20X

24 X

28 X

32 X

Th« copy filmed hero ha* ii««n reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

BibliothAque nationale du Qu6bec

The images appearing here are the best quslity
possible considering the condition and legibiiity
of the original copy and in Iceeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the bacit cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol —»-( meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

L'exemplaire filmA fi/t reproduit grAce A la
gAnArositA de:

Bibliothdque nationale du Quebec

Lds images suivantes ont 6tA reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film*, at en
conformity avec las conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimis sont fiimis en commen^ant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
derniire page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'iilustration, soit par le second
plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont fiimts en commenQsnt par la
premiere page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par
la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la
dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbols —^ sig.iifie "A SUIVRE ". le
symbols V signifie "FIN".

Les cartes, lilanches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent dtre
filmto d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un seui ciichA. il est film6 d partir
de I'angie supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite.
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mAthode.

32 X

Natural Philosophy

AID

Divine Revelation.

■T

JOHN HARRIS.

PfUNTED BY LOVELL PRINTING AND PURLISrilNQ CV.
St. .VicHotAs Strut.

AroTUST, 1875.

; ■ r , ; ) ! 1

•1 • •

40423

Entered according to Act of Parliament in the year one thousand eight hundred
and gcventy-tlve, by John IIa«bis, in the office of the Minister of Agriculture
and SUtistics Ottawa.

lit

i|r

MO»TEaAL:-i-LOVELL rniNTlNO AND PrBLISUINO COMPAWY, rBINTEES,

.. . . . . .•

♦ • • ; •

»• • : • ■

• • • • •

- — ■^-■■-^ -^ ■■■- '■ n i HM n

' "■ iiM «i*W i g M nw i rin ii fci i >i

k:i4n .mi af'mmltmiAlt

fe>*

'< -\:

NATURAL PHILOSOPHY AND DIVINE REVELATION.

•And the Sorpent said unto the woman : Te shall not >urely die.'

PREFACE.

Wk purpose in the following pages to consider briefly,
but carefuUy, the arguments and conclusions put before
the, public on the subject of Divine Revelation by cer-
tain recent writers on speculative theology.

To pass in review and examine critically the writings
of a number of individual authors who have published
their thoughts and opinions on physical death, on an
after state of existence, and on the nature of the future
life (assuming such future life to be a reasonable pro-
bability), would not have, we think, any practical utility,
even supposing it were to be very well done. At best it
could but add a few drops to the ocean of literature on
the subject before, the public. Merel3i to heap up more
arguments where the persevering and determined reader,
if he proceed far enough, is already fated to be over-
whelmed and sufibcated, would be, indeed, to perform the
reverse of a beneficial and useful work.

^ , "^ PaXFAOK.

What we think is much needed, and by which a very
useful purpose may be accomplished, is to separate into
classes and to discriminate characteristically between
the works of the various authors, and then to examine
them fundamentally, not as to the plausibility of the
arguments, not as to the learning and ability of the re-
spective authors, nor as to the eloquence and refinement
with which the arguments may be expressed, or the
beauty and sublimity of tlie language in which the
conclusions may be clothed, but, as to whether tlie
arguments and conclusions be or bo not legitimate and
reasonable.

t i

chaptj:r I.

RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY.

Classification. — As a primary and general classification
Me propose to separate tlie writers on this subject into
three groups :

Ist. Those who have written in support of the exclu-
sive dogmatic tenets of some one religious sect.

2nd. Those who have written with an avowed or in-
herent disbelief in the existence of a personal God who
has revealed Himself in any intelligible and distinct sense
to man.

3rd. Those who, avowing a decided belief in the
existence and attributes of a revealed God, have written
in more or less doubt as to the precise nature and extent
of the presumed rtn-elation.

It is the works of the last class of writers that we
purpose to consider here more particularly. Since the
objections we wish to state in regard to the conclusions
arrived at, are as to their non-scientific and unsafe charac-
ter because improperhj arrived at, it will be most conve-
nient and practically useful to take the works of some
one author of great ability and repute for the purpose of
defining, illustrating and making manifest the fallacy in
the method of investigation which in our opinion vitiates
and renders unsafe, in a greater or lesser degree, the con-
^jlusions arrived at thereby, not only ir ^he writings of the

'NATIJKAL IMllLOauPHV AND DIVINK UEVELATION.'

Correction of I'ypoyraphical Error.

Pago 36. . The bottom line; and ) ,,,
Pago 34...The Hocond line from ( ^'^f- ' ♦^'hfiilnes. '
bottom. S '^~^'^- trustfulness.

PREFACE.

What we think is much needed, and by which a very
useful purpose may be accomplished, is to separate into
classes and to discriminate characteristically between
the works of the various authors, and then to examine
them fundamentally, not as to the plausibility of the
arguments, not as to the learning and ability of tlie re-
spective authors, nor as to the eloquence and refmement
with which the arguments may be expressed, or the
beauty and sublimity of the language in which the
conclusions may be clothed, but, as to whether the
arguments and conclusions »>e or be not legitimate and
reasonable.

i ' i

•

^^di?

CHAPTER I.

HKLIOIOUS PHILOSOPHY.

Classification.— As a primary and general clasaification
AVe propose to separate the writers on this subject into
three groups :

Ist. Those who liave written in support of the exclu-
sive dogmatic tenets of some one religious sect.

2nd. Those who have written with an avowed or in-
herent disbelief in tlie existence of a personal God who
has revealed Himself in any intelligible and distinct sense
to man.

3rd. Those who, avowing a decided belief in the
existence and attributes of a revealed God, have written
in more or less doubt as to the precise nature and extent
of the presumed rLH-elation.

It is the works of the last class of writers that we
purpose to consider here more pai.lcularly. Since the
objections we wish to state in regard to the conclusions
arrived at, are as to their non-scientific and unsafe charac-
ter because improiierhj arrived at, it will be most conve-
nient and practically useful to take the works of some
one author of great ability and repute for the purpose of
defining, illustrating and making manifest the fallacy in
the method of investigation which in our opinion vitiates
and renders unsafe, in a greater or lesser degree, the con-
clusions arrived at thereby, not only in the writings of the
one author but in those of the others also belonging to
the same division.

We will take therefore as the illustration and immedi-
ate subject of our examination the works of the eminent
American theologian, Theodore Parker.

^/f'

*» RBLr0I0U8 PHILOSOPHY.

The Doctrines of Theodore Parker :
In selecting for consideration the doctrines of this
writer as the outcome nnd intellectual result of an earn-
est but mistaken and illegitimate endeavour to solve by-
means of natural philosophy, problems of great difficulty
belonging to ideal science, we have been mindful of the
educational advantages possessed by him, as well as of the
natural ability displayed ia the use of those advantages, to
justify lis in treating him as the intellectual representative
of many other writers on speculative theology.

We wish it to be understood that in critically examin-
ing these writings we are not intending to praise, blame
or pass judgment in any degree upon the author as an
individual man, but upon his doctrines as a teacher and
as the intellectual representative of a class. What were
his qualifications ?

He was a very learned man, possessed of much know-
ledge of various kinds, a man of great industry, of per-
severance, of superior natural ability, eloquent, excelling
in literary skill, experienced as a natural philosopher in
the application of reasoning to the affairs of the natural
life. The record of his out-ward life exhibits him as a man
of moral rectitude of conduct, of earnest religious feeling,
and of devotion to the ministrations belonging to his office
as a teacher and witness of God to the people under his
charge.

Let us first define the correct significance and value of
certain of those expressions (verbal compounds) which
have a necessary and important relation to the subject,
and then proceed to examine with particularity the fallacy
in the method of Mr. Parker's investigation.

We have elsewhere defined scientific knowledge as

RELIUIuL's) PHILOSOPUV.

knowledge which is in a strict sense misonable, i.e.,
which is true, certain and real. The difficulty is in certain
cases for the individual man to discriminate, and to
determine whether that which presents itself to him as
scientific knowledge, actually i)ossesse8 these character-
istics or not. Now, if each man was obliged to investigate
every item of knowledge for himself, and was to refuse
to believe anything to be true which he could not him-
self demonstrate mathematically to be 80» his progress in
the acquisition of knowledge would be bi-.t very slow,
even supposing the difficulty of his thus making a com-
mencement, could be surmounted. And then, again, un-
less we suppose his mathematical ability perfect in an
absolute sense, he would after all run the risk of fallacies
in the demonstrations which seemed to him quite sound.
But a man can in very many cases acquire compounded
knowledge with reasonable certainty as to its truthful-
ness and reality, although he may be himself quite un-
able to directly verify it or to analyze it mathematically.
Whenever the subject be of such kind that knowledge
thereof can be acquired by humai observation, and
a number of able and truthful men, having investigated
and acquired knowledge of the subject, concur in stating
a certain result or conclusion as demonstrated and certain,
the individual man may accept such compounded know-
ledge with certainty through his knowledge of the truth-
fulness and reliability, or the wisdom and faithfulness, of
those who communicate it to him. The question which
he, as an intelligent being, has in such a case to decide
for himself, is : What are the grounds of my confidence in
the persons who inform me that this statement is true : do
ihey suffice to justify my acceptance of their instruction?

i\'f

;..

f \

Rrtioiors PHILCSOpiiy.

I am urhiMo to inve8tigu(. the mnrter forn.ysflf. I can-
"<'| '/' '.ht tlu' Mncerity «.ul truthfu x, of tl.ese person*
.ndmdu..%. I feel sure that they have, each one of them,
used the proper means to acquire knowledge of the sub-
ject, and they all agree as to the fact. Therefore I believe
the.r 8taten,ent, and accept it as certainly true. A n.au
thusacfng nets reasonably, for what would be the con-
8e,p.enceif he pursued theopposite cot.rse, and persisted
in accepting as true only his own personal judgments and
conclusions. It is evident that his mind would be filled
with prejudices and fallacies; he would be either con-
sidered wrong-headed and insane by his neighbours or if
any were foolish enough to accept his conclusions as right
and true, their minds woul.I be also contaminated and
the.nntellectual health in.paired by unsound judgments
and false theories. **

Moreover, in thus accepting knowledge through rea-
sonable trust an.l conH.lenoe i.i tlie teacher, the responsi
bil.ty ,s mainly with the teaoiier and only in a minor de-
gree with the recipient. He who thus accepts know-
ledge which is actually unsound must suffer in some de-
gree for the teacher's fault ; nevertheless if his trustful-
ness :vere in itself reasonable, he will, even in such case
nave gamed by his acceptance. '

Natural philosophy is systemized rcn.oning correctly
applicable only to the Natural or Jfaterial world reason
ing based on the natural human senses. If correc^v
systemized and applied only to the subjects of natural
science in .heir relations only to the natural world
natural p. ■.r.J,, i^ , perfectly safe and reliable guide'
but If It hv -;-,i;.d-. the spiritual subjects of ideal
science without , knowledge y or with a neglect of;, •

L&~

HiLniiora I'liii-osoi'iiv.

for myself. I can-
's of tliesf persons
each one of them,
vledge of the 8ub-
'herefore I believe
liiily true. A man
vould be the oon-
rse, and persisted
al judgments and
id would be filled
'd be either con-
neighbours, or, if
iiclusions ns right
ontaminated and
sound judgments

Ige through rea-
er, the responsi-
y^ in a minor de-
accepts know-
ffer in some de-
I if his trustful-
en in such case,

)ning correctly
world . . renson-
3. If correctly
ects of natural
natural world,
reliable guide;
Jjects of ideal
a neglect of,, '

the rttrii-t ruk'« Uy which idone reasoning on suoh suh-
Jffts is Huthorizfd, it uuiy then be cunsidored synony.
mou8 with unmitud spiritnul philosophy, and become*
liilhu-iuus and deceptive.

The term true or sound kuoulalfje as applied to the
major p.nt of hinnmi knowledge, necessarily means
knowledge vwiicli, being imperiect or imperfectly
npiirt bended, is essentially and characteristically true
so far as apprehended, and which guides the mind
accepting it truthfully in the right direction. It mi.y
be that the light fiu-nished by it in a particular instance
is not much, and even that little may not be light dhrctli/
derived from the great central source of light ; but if it
be true knowledge it must k dcrivid from that source,
and however dLn and small in quantity may be the
ligiit furnished by it, it will illumine and make
majiifest some portion of the jKith which leads towards
the full clear light of the day.

Thus the degree of perfection of sound knowledge is
in a measure dependent upon the intellectual appre-
hension and educated capacity of the recipient. All
teachers know that to communicate simply and directly
the full truth on subjects belonging to the ideal world
would be in some cases to state what could not be intelli-
glide, and ia other cases to astound and perplex the
person they were desirous to instruct. Hence the
advantageous and oftentimes necessary use of symbolic
and figurative language, of fable, parable, and allegory,
as vehicle of sound and true instruction on subjects
belonging to ideal science.

The primary characteristic of Parker's doctrines,
whether considering him as an individual teacher or as

! •■ I

REtroiOUS PHILOSOPHY.

the exponent and representative of a clas, of teachers, is
that he rqects the Bible as the word of God, „r, to sp ak
more „„„„„„, „, ,,, .„.^„^^^^^, -P™^

the Creator to H„ h„„,„ ereatures, and that he bases

tire B,ble-a„d wl,j- does he prefer it?

B^7™ of the consequences of this rejection of the

The Bible i, too great a fact to be disregarded. That

^ san ,„ , „.,„,^„, ^„^ edncati„:al connection

with the subject ,s too patent to be overlooked, and that

t « to sonre extent at least inseparable fron, an, ,st L

of Chns ,a„ theology is quite evident : hence the B^e "

t ve of he act,ons and lives of men who were devoted to

men tTr; : - ""^ '" "-' ""'=' -- «-'«"j tz

™t « ho were nevertheless either wilful i„,,,ost„rs or els
' '"^T" «-™ '-J-tions, Thi ultimate c!

lute God of truth has at least recognised as true and

approved as an educational „,ea„s,a°bookwhi:
-lyessent,aUy untrue but which grossly misreprese"
H.S character and relationship to „,anki„d.

The basis which Parker chooses as the foundation of
h.s doctnne ,s the idea of God evolved from the inner

o„sc,ousuess. The precise moaning which he attaches
this expression is not defined. It does not clearly

appear that he is aware ti,at hi, system is left without •

lass of teachers, is
Grod, or, to speak
evelation of God
nd that he bases
an upon another
ediately suggests
ich he prefers to

stion, let us con-
rejection of the

regarded. That
ional connection
looked, and that
rom any system
nice the Bible is
y, as the narra-
vere devoted to
* great and good
le human race,
ipostors or else
lie ultimate co-

that the abso-
d as true, and
t which is not

misrepresents

ft>uudation of
om the inner
iii he attaches
s not clearly
3 left without

KELIOIOUS PHILOSOPHY.

any other support : for he does not take any care to
explain or show how this idea has of itself, without aid
or support from the Bible, or those teachers whose lives
belong essentially to the Bible, become developed into
the theism or system of theology which he teaches.

The positive portion of Mr. Parker's system is philo-
sophically as inconsequential and incoherent as the
negative. It appears to consist of three distinct theories
irreconcilable with each other and incapable of combin-
ing, and which are brought out sometimes singly and
separately, and sometimes in a more or less mingled
"Condition, as the exigencies of the argument or difficulties
requiring explanation may call for.

Theory 1. is materialistic. That the material world is
the universe which has been made over as a possession
to mankind, and that mankind has been continually
improving and progressing from the earliest ages to the
present. Their religious opinions and beliefs at eacih
stage oi" this advancing civilization having been merely
the intellectual product or resultof their mental condition.

Theory 2, teaches a divinity of human nature. Each
and every man is divinely inspired. Each and every
man is continually progressing towards the divine
perfection. A man's faults and sins improve and elevate
him and assist his progress upwards although not so
rapidly as if his actions were regulated by a more en-
lightened understanding. The present life is only the
first stage, and a man having become disburthened of
his bodily incumbrance springs suddenly upwards or
advances much more rapidly towards divine perfection.

Theory 3. The Non-existence of intellectual individuality
apart from God. — God liaving pre-ordained and pre-

RELIGIOUS PHlLOSOPliy

for the ,.2 ""' ""'' °""™' »'«' «'«o

fo the s aer,„g, a,,., priv„,i„,„ „, „„^ „„ .__

that the perfec i„,tc„V^ ""''"' "°"*'1''«"-'
.' J ''™ of O'' must have provided an,

not „hta„,ed„ share of „app,„,,„„„j .„ ,„,^ ^
most favoured or n»,t fortunate brother will reeeive that
«™nce, to which he has a natural aud rightl ewl"'

n'l«l t „ evidently i„eon,i,tent, is JI,- Parker's
conception or apprehension, of the nature of ,^d j

?re utrt'' '^'"™ - "'^ '■■'*-•«' »l-
It r ™''^ -neomplete, one-sided and imperfect

' :: i:f' "^ "'^ ^""-^ -'"«™ »f «od'tote ;

theilChtl^l'S^^'Tr^^^^^
terrestri..] off-.- ' '""^ ^'■''^*^*' ^^ their

=.~t;;dtr;:r~^^

dnrf • .! ' l"'"'sh"iont is according to his '

^o*,ne „e expiation of sin ,y suffering. The s'ui^ri g

rectify the consequences and absolve the shrner. la

VllY.

Jenetl or cun happen
iral and intellectual
le for the actions of
nd crimes, and also
nay undergo in this.

as a consequence,
fc liave provided aa
idual man who has.
liial to that of his-
er wiJl receive that
'"d rightful claim.
;h eitlier of which,

is Mr. Parker's
iture of God and
Ilectual creatures,
•d's presence and
constant guidance
ivine Spirit, are
1 very beautiful '
•ehension of the
on of Himself in
id and imperfect,
'n of God to men
reme Ruler over
irbiter of their
rently recognize
o do so indeed

of punishment
ccording to his
. The suffering
of itself sutHce*
he sinner. la

RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY.

1»

this connection human justice is described as distinct and
different in kind from divine justice, the punishment
inflicted by human justice having the character of
vengeance. That this item of doctrine is, whether
considered as a theoretical assumption or as a con-
clusion, certainly false and of a very dangerous ten-
dency we have no hesitation in affirming. By human
justice is to be understood perfect, or perfected, human
justice, and between such human justice and divine
justice there can be no differance in kind or distinction ;
huma.! ■ ustice is divine justice applied by or through men
to the terrestrial circumstances and affairs of men. To
doubt this, or to suppose otherwise, is to suppose that
the mind of God is different in kind from the mind of
man, to deny or refuse to believe that man has been
created in the image of God, and, consequently, to
throw overboard at once all reasonable or intelligible
reliance on the truthfulness, faithfulness, love and
justice, of God.

In connection with the imperfect recognition of God's
relationship to man, as set forth in the Bible, is the non-
recognition of obedience and submission to the will of
God, on the one hand, of wilful disregard of God's
commandments and rebellion against His authority and
government, on the other. In this human scheme of
man's existence and relation to his Maker, put forth by
Mr. Parker, the rights and claims appear to be all on
the one side. J[an as the created becomes entitled, in
addition to the perpetuation of his existence, to assured
happiness, to a progressive development, and to a num-
ber of specific blessings, but it does not clearly appear
that the Creator has acquired any rights in relation to
man or is entitled to claim recognition, reverence and

- 16

RELlaiocs PHILOSOPUV.

tllZ "7 '^' '"*"'"'' "''"« '' '- ««"«i into

connected with it have Jen frith! J?™*™"''"
feet, not to sav very bad B T! T^ '"P""

has anywhere "tat^ I """""' ""'' """ ^

existe„r: """""''^ <^""*'"'" of human

Mrilybe *" ™"»")«™ces thereof must neces-

What are those conditions? A number of intellectnal '

< .Hermg ,n their mclinations and passions, i„ the acti

^1^1 'Tf"'' '''"' ""^ '» '"^'' -A-
earhTh °*f ' "° ""' *» "™ '"^^fer on the
earth, each one under the control, within certain limits
of ->.» own will, having to learn for himself, by i ™™

ference between nght and wrong, and the conLuences

o:dttT"f"'"""*'^- "'"'"--videnttlat:
conduct of each one individual must affect others- his

e P~ T "' T:' "' "' -" "P"- and au^
♦JApense ot others. If he Hp oTr^,. =^ n i-
J • ^^^^ '^0 well dlSDOSed anrt

*s,ro„s to do right, he has to learn to discrim'i ntte and •

lY.

he has called into
as his own welfare
th permit, to the

h inequalities, and
of great trouble
cable mystery to
g outside convic-
nd justice of the
ns to set matters
ude that the plan
the arrangements
first very imper-
inot find that he
itions of human
rrestrial life, and
io{ must neces-

ir of intellectual
tirely, ignorant,
IS, in the acti-
heir capacities
)gether on the

certain limits,
'f, by his own
sason, the dif-

consequences
i'ident tliat the
it others; his
iseandatthe
disposed and
riminate and

BELIOIOUS PHILOSOPHY,

choose the right from the wrong. But he has animal
passions and inclinations, and inteUectual passions and
inclinations. What if he be wilful and selfish; and,
knowing what right is, does not choose the right but
deliberately does that which is evil ? Must not some
other individual or individuals suffer the consequences^
whether he himself eventually gains or loses thereby ?
Very much of the inequality, injustice, pain, and miseries
in the world are thus rt aJily accounted for. Very much
of the difficulty and mystery attaching to an indiscri-
minate disorderly consideration of a number of hetero-
geneous phenomena is at once eliminated. To men thus
circumstanced, so soon as some knowledge had been ac-
quired, the definite question would suggest itself: I»
this life which we enjoy here, or which we spend in
labour and trouble here, the end and sole object of our
existence ? We feel that we are, as intellectual beings,
in some degree distinct from and superior to our bodies.
After a time the body dies and the human being disap-
pears from the apprehension of his fellows, but does he
necessarily cease to exist as an intellectual being ? Can we
reasonably expect to live after this bodily terrestrial life
is ended ? Putting aside the immediate reply to this ques-
tion, we know that many who have written on this sub-
ject have expressed the opinion that the terrestrial human
life is not in itself a state of existence to be thankful for ;
that, were it not for the hope of something much better
to follow, it would be scarcely endurable, or even quite
unendurable. We believe such to be the deliberate opi-
nion of, comparatively speaking, but very few individuuls.
If the whole human race could be canvassed at the pre-
sent time, or, if at any former period of the world's

I I

HELiarous PHiLosopnr.

h,st.,y ,„eh a complete coUecHo,, of the „pi„i„„, „f .„
could have been made, we feel sure the result would
h.ve shown the agreement b, a vast majority, that 7,
our present existence is a pleasure to u„ ' boon fo
»h,ch we are grateful and which we do not Ih to
forego u„t,l our allotted time has expired

A httle reflection will suggest some considerations in
h,s connecfon which may not be immediately apparen

even tl,„se less considerate of the welfare and h.ppines

fee. g that .l,ey are benefiting or have benefited other
people Now a cond.t.on of barbarism is fraught with
har sh,ps, pr,vations,and miseries which in a condition of

ed, the,r place bemg supplied by pleasures and eniov-

": be ": r,"*'°" "' " """' perfect civili Z
n.nst be preceded by a partial or less perf-ect ; and that
»gau,, by a condition of barbarism. Those, theUre, wlj
■ve m a t,me when the less perfect civiLation p.;v" ,
have the safsfaction of knowing, if their lives are pe
reasonably and usefully, that, in addition to whaZv
, easnre and enjoyment their lives aiTord thems*
they are also benefiting and adding to the happi 2
of their successors. pp"iess

Let us now proceed to the question : Have we, or can

we obtain any evidence or reliable information at .

<»nt,nuation of our existence in a life after the death of

be human body. The primary question npon which

this IS dependent is , do we possess demonstration of the

existence of God the Creaort With exceptio, o .

not wish to

HELIOIOUS PHIL080PHT. 19

few individuals all educated men are agreed that the
world is full of evidences that God exists.

Then, if there be an after existence for men, God must
know it, and must certainly be able to communicate the
knowledge to men, if he please. Now if there be an after-
life, it at once follows as extremely probable, nay almost
certain, that the present life with its conditions has rela-
tion, as introductory or preparatory, to the after-life.
Again, if this life be related to an after existence as a
place of preparation, or training school, it is evidently
important that men should have reliable information of
sucli a fact, and an inference of the very strongest des-
cription is forced upon the mind, that God halving the
knowledge and wishing, as by the supposition he must
<lo, that man should understand the condition of his exis-
tence, so far as it could be made intelligible to him in
his ignorant or semi-educated state, must have taken
some means to communicate the requisite information to
him.

Assuming reliable information to have been obtained
as to an after life, and that the main purpose of the
present human life is educational: namely, a prepara-
tion for those higher conditions of existence belonging
to the future.. the further question presents itself: ll
the after life in hen: , J and obtained by all men alike
whatever use they make of the present? " If, knowing of
this after existence, .having been informed by God that
preparation for it is necessary and that their lives here
on earth are expressly intended for that purpose, they
disregard the information and refuse or neglect to make
the requisite preparation. .What then ?

Theodore Parker gives three definitions of the word

'• n

RELI0I0U8 PHILOSOl'Iiy.

m-ack, twoof which are, ve opine, quite inadmissible.
There are words undoubtedly of which a full and com-
plete definition presents considerable difficulty, and re-
quires the possession of much and varied learning. We
^^0 not tliink, however, that nuracle is one of those
words. On tho contrary, its meaning is easily under-
stood and readily admits of definit^-on.

A miracle or miraculous result is that which is produce.!
by a supernatural cause. This definition supposes the
^■ase to winch the expression is applied to be one of such
a character and of which the conditions are so well under-
stood that it is either manifestly evident or satisfactorily
certain that the result cannot have been produced by a
muural cause . . .•. e. by a cause belonging to the material

Taking this definition . . it immediately follows that
hose who do not believe in the possibility of a miracle,
.10 not beheve in the existence of any power outside the
niatenal world. Or, if they believe in God as existing
independently, they do not admit the possibility of Hit
actmg m the material world except by and through the
ordinary laws of nature. Those who, on the contrary, feel
nodifficulty in believing the possibility of a miracle, may
of course, be dissatisfied in any particular case as to the
credibility of the testimony or the sufficiency of the
historical evidence.

The arguments and opinions put forth by Mr
Parker on the subject of the miracles recorded and
circumstantially narrated in the Bible, constitute an
instance of perverse and inconsequential reasoning., to
which, considering the serious and important nature
of the subject, and the advantages of acquired know-

BELIOIOCS PHILOSOPHY.

ledge possessed by the teacher, we can apply no
expression so suitable as the word < frightful.' Starting
off with a professed and doubtless sincere belief in God
as the living Supreme Intelligence actively concerned
in the affairs of men ; acknowledging His omnipotent
power over the creatures and laws of the material world ;
well informed as to the claims of the Bible to be con^
sidered the revelation by God of His relationship to man
and of the condition of man's spii tual existence ; quite
aware of the reasonable probability that special witnesses
to God's name would be supported, and the authenticity
of their appointment as divine messengers be attested,
by just such manifestations of supernatural power,.,
he expresses his decided disbelief in the miracles, and
does so in strong and even contemptuous language..
Whether, indood, this most inconsequential judgment
is based on his disinclination to believe the possibility
of a miracle, or on his dislike to admitting that certain
men have been at various times appointed by God
as His specially authorized agents, is not clear. In
order to support and justify his disbelief, men whom
he extols as amongst the wisest, the most unselfish
and the best that have ever lived, are supposed,
some of them, to have practised an organized and most
wicked system of deception in the name of God, whilst
others under the inspiration and guidance of the Divine
Spirit were grossly deceived by the impostures and de-
ceptions of the first. After all, there remain particular
cases, which even the wildest and most extravagant of
these suppositions does not suffice to give any intelligible
explanation of: for example, the alleged miracle attending
•the conversion of St. Paul. No doubt is expressed that

BELIQIOCS PHILOSOPHY.

St. Paul ,8 himself a real historical personage, who wrote
the writings ascribed to him ai.,1 acted as narrated in the
New Testament; he is moreover extolled as an especially
manly and upright character, a man of superior ability
and intellectual power, whose life was devoted to what he
beheved to be the service of the God of truth, the omni-
present and all-wise God, who could not be deceived and
to whom a lie was utterly hateful. Now as to the cir-
cumstances alleged to have attended St. Paul's conversion
we have not only the orderly narrative relating the cir-
cumstances as in Che case of the other miracles, but, also
we have St. Paul's own circumstantial and minute re-
lation of the particulars, not alone of his being struck
blind and hearing the voice, but also of his being directed
to go to Ananias, of his going as directed, and of the
niiraculous restoration of his sight. Admitting the
historical reality of St. Paul himself and the general truth
of his biography, is there any reasonable choice whatever
other than to believe and accept his relation of the cir-
cumstances as strictly true, or else to condemn him as
having concocted ami palmed off upon the credulity
of mankind a false statement, .an invented story of
which the wickedness would be only equalled by its im-
probability ?. . .But this alternative is not reasonably ad-
missible even as an assumption or supposition, because
the man demonstrated beyond all question by his sub-
sequent conduct throughout the remainder of his life his
own sincere and thorough belief in the truth of his own
statement.

A man who fails to understand that, if Christianity
has been expressly authorized, acknowledged and sup-
ported by the Divine Spirit, the miracles by which it

RELlQIOrs PHtLOSOPHV,

was inaugiiruted, and upon which it is in part based,
must necessarily be true, and who, therefore, disbelieves
those miracles, is only consistent in disbelieving the
similar miracles belonging to the much earlier time of
Moses and the other prophets whose acts and lives are
recorded in the Old Testament. There are, however,
miracles of a different character, which, belonging more
strictly to the realm of ideal science, tender their testi-
mony especially to the intellectual and educated man
Thus we have the continuous miracle, extending over
a long period of time, during which many successive
generations of men lived and passed away, of the pro-
duction and preservation of the record called the Old
Testament. We shall hereafter take occasion to show
that these writings contain den.on.tration, in the strictest
mathematical sense, of the Divine Authorship ; that is, of
their having been written, compiled and preserved under
and with the inspiration, sanction, and supervision of the
All-Wise Divine Spirit. For the present, let us take the
case of the Decalogue. Now Theodore Parker comes
forward as a learned teacher having x highly cultivated
mmd-does the Decalogue manifest itself to him as a
miracle ? No. He observes :

" Of the law.-ThiH comprises the first five books of the
Bible. They are commonly ascribed to Moses; but there
18 no proof that he wrote a word of them. Only the
Decalogue, in a compendious form, and perhaps a few
fragments, can bo referred to him with much probability
BesKlea, the character of the books is such
that a very high place is not to be assigned them among
human compositions, measured by the standard of the
present day."

But educated men have to ask themselves the ques-

24 RKLI0I0P8 PHILOSOPHy.

tion— ig this a /easonablo conclusion f Let us consider
the document itself. Is it conceivable that any amount
"Of hunum wisdom, legal knowledge and literary ability,
«ombined in one individual, could alone have enabled
any man at iiy age of the world to compile such a docu-
ment 1 This question is asked, taking the Commandments
in their literal usual sense, that is, in their application to
the terrestrial affuirsof nien,andn8 the fundamental bases
of the laws of the civilized world for all time ; but a
comparatively few men, possessing n knowledge of ideal
science, are aware that each commandment contains also a
spiritual signification deeper, broader, and more compre-
hensive than tiiat which applies to the temporal govern-
ment of men as inhabitants of the Earth only. Let us
obsei-ve, moreover, that if Jloses be accepted as a historical
reality and the events of his life recorded in the old Tes-
tament be accepted as substantially true, then, if the
strictly Divine Authorship of the Decalogue be disbelieved,
we have a case presenting a similar character to that of
Saint Paul relating the circumstances of his conversion.
For the document purports to be a personal declaration
by the Creator, and was published by Moses with the
express statement that he had received it directly from
God. There is no reasonable alternative if we do not
accept his statement as strictly true, other than to con-
demn him as having deliberately fabricated the document
and represented it falsely as coming from God, because he
must have known whether he received it from God or not.
But neither is the alternative reasonably admissible, for it
involves the assumption that Moses was an irreligious
man and an atheist, otherwise he could not have ventured
to put himself in the place of God in the manner supposed.

RiLimova PHFLosoriiT.

Now such assiiniptioii is directly coiitrovorted by the
aiiinitted facts, namely, that iMosos was a religious man,
who proved himself by his acts and conduct to be a sincere
believer in the existence aud power of God, to whoso
service he devoted his life in an especial manner.

!'■■■ M I

ilii H

CHAPTER II.

SUPERSTITIOJf.

When I cocjider how my light is spent

Ere half my days, in this dark world and wide,

And that one talent, which is death to hide,

Lodged with me useless, though my soul more bent

To serve therewith my Maker, and present

My true account, lest he returning chide ;

" Doth God exact day labour, light denied ?"

I fondly ask; But Patience, to prevent

That murmur, soon replies, " God doth not need

Either man's work or his own gifu j who best

Bear His mild yoke, they serve Him best : His state

Is kingly; thousands at His bidding speed.

And post o'er land and ocean without rest ;

They also serve who only stand and wait."

Milton,

The word Superstition, although there may be, as in
fact there are, great and multifarious differences of opinion
as to its correct application in particular cases, is not one
of those words of which the correct definition presents
any difficulty. Superstition means . .unreasonable belief,
and unreasonable disbelief; and it may be accordingly
divided into positive superstition and negative supersti-
tion.

Of that application of the word which he considers
correct, and the illustration of the word afforded, as he
thinks, by certain forms of Christian belief, Theodore
Parker writes thus :— (vol. i. Page 85.)

" Of Superstition— Combining with Ignorance and Fear,
the Religious Element leads to Superstition. This is the
vilification and debasement of men. It may be defined as
FEAR BEFORK GoD. Plutarch, though himself religious.

SUPERSTITION.

•Pi

'** pronounced it worse than Atheism. But the latter cannot
exist to the same extent; is never an active principle.
Superstition is a morbid state of human nature, where the
conditions of religious development are not fulfilled ; where
tiie fiinotions of the religious faculty are impeded and
counteracted. But it must act, .as the heart beats, in the
frenzy of a fever. It has been said with truth, " Perfect love
casts out fear." The converse is quite as true. Perfect fear
casts out love. The superstitious man bpgino by fearing
God, not loving him. He goes on, like a timid boy in the
darkness, by projecting his own conceptions out of himself :
conjuring up a phantom he calls his God ; a Deity capricious
cruel, revengeful, lying in wait for the unwary ; a God ugly,
morose, and only to be feared. He ends by paying a service
meet for such a God, the service of Horror and Fear. Each
man's conception of God is his conception of a man carried
out to infinity ; the pure idea is eclipsed by a human per-
sonality. This conception therefore varies as the men who
form it vary. It is the index of their soul. The super,
stitious man projects out of himself a creation begotten of
his Folly and his Fear ; calls the furious phantom God,
Moloch, Jehovah; then attempts to please the capricious
Being he has conjured up. To do this, the demands his
Superstition makes are not to keep the laws which the one
God wrote on the walls of Man's being ; but to do arbitrary
acts which this fancied God demands. He must give up to
the deity what is dearest to himself. Hence the savage
offers a sacrifice of favourite articles of food, the first fruits of
the chase, or agriculture ; weapons of war which hiwe done
■signal service; the nobler animals; the skins of rare
beasts. He conceives the anger of his God may be soothed
like a man's excited passion by libations, incense, the smoke
•of plants, the steam of a sacrifice.

Again, the superstitious man would appease his God by
unnatural personal service. He undertakes an enterprise,"

n\\

SUPERSTITION.

" almost impossible, and succeeds, for the fire of his purpose
subdues and softens the rock that opposes him. He submits
topainfbl privation of food, rest, clothing; leads a life of
solitude : wears a comfortless dress, that girds and frets the
very flesh ; stands in a painful position ; shuts himself up in
a dungeon ; lives in a cave ; stands on a pillar's top ; goes
unshorn and filthy. Ho exposes himself to be scorched by
the fiun and frozen by the frost. He lacerates his flesh ; punc-
tures his skin to recoivo sacred figures of the Gods. He
mutilates his body, cutting off" the most useful members.
H« fiacrifices his cattle, his enemies, his children ; defiles
the sacred temple of his body: destroys his mortal life to
serve his G J. In a state more refined, superstition demands
abstinence from all the sensual goods of life. Its present
pleasures are a godless thing. The flesh is damned. To
serve God is to mortify the appetites God gave. Then the
superstitious man abstains from comfortable food, clothing,
and shelter; comes neither eating nor drinking; watches all
night absorbed in holy vigils. The man of God must be
thin and spare. Bernard has but to show his neck, fleshless
and scraggy, to be confessed a mighty saint. Above all, he
must abstain from marriage. The Devil lurks under the
bridal rose. The vow of the celibate can send him howling
back to hell. The smothered volcano is grateftil to God.
Then comes the assumption of arbitrary vows; the perfor-
mance of pilgrimages to distant places, thinly clad and
barefoot ; the repetition of prayers, not as a delight, spon-
taneously poured out, but as a penance, or work of supere-
rogation. In this state, superstition builds convents, mo-
nasteries, sends Anthony to his dwelling in the desert : it
founds orders of Mendicants, Eechabites, Nazarites, Encra-
tites, Pilgrims, Flag.-llants; and similar Moss-troopers of
Religion, whom Heaven yet turns to good account. This
is the Superstition of the Flesh. It promises the favour of '^

BUPfcRSTITION.

" its God on condition of these most useless and arbitrary acts.
It dwells on the absurdest of externals.

However, in a later day it goes to still more subtle refino-
menta. The man does not mutilate his body, nor give up
the most sacred of his material possessions. This was the
superstition of savage life. But he mutilates his soul : gives
up the most sacred of his spiritual treasures. This is the
superstition of refined life. Here the man is ready to forego
Reason, Conscience, and Love, God's most precious gifts ;
the noblest attributes of Man : the tie that softly joins him
to the eternal -world. He will think agianst Reason ; decide
against Conscience : act against Low ; because he dreams
the God of Reason, Conscience, and Love demands it. It is
a slight thing to hack and mutilate the body, though it bo
the fairest temple God ever made, and to mar its complete-
ness a, sin. But to dismember the soul, the very image of
God ; to lop off most sacred affections ; to call Reason a liar,
Conscience a devil's-oracle, and cast Love clean out from the
heart, this is the last triumph of Superstition ; but one
often TiUnessed in all these forms of Religion — Fetichism,
Polytheism, Monotheism ; in all ages before Christ and all
ages after Christ. This is the Superstition of the Soul. The
one might be the Superstition of the Hero ; this is the Su-
perstition of the Pharisee

A man rude in spirit must have a rude conception of God.
He thinks the Deity like himself If a buffalo had a religion,
his conception of Deity would probably be a buffalo, fairer
limbed, stronger and swifter than himself, grazing in the
fairest meadows of Heaven. If he were superstitious, his
service would consist in offerings of grass, of water, of salt;
perhaps in abstinence from the pleasures, comforts, necessi-
ties of a bison's life. His devil would also be a buffalo, but of
another colour, lean, vicious, and ugly. Now when a man has
these rude conceptions, inseparable from a rude state, offer-
ings and sacrifice are natural. When they come spontan-"

SUPERSTITION.

" eous, as the expreasion of a grateful or penitent heart; the
6eal of a resolution; the sign of Faith, Hope and Love, as an
outward symbol which strengthens the in-dwelling sentiment
—the sacrifice is pleasant and may be beautiful. The child
who saw God in the swelling and rounded clouds of a June
-day, and left on a rock the ribbon-grass and garden roses as
mute symbols of gratitude to the Great Spirit who poured
■out the voluptuous weather; the ancient pagan who bowed
prone to the dust, in homage, as the sun looked out from the
•windows of morning, or offered the smoke of incense at
Bight-fall in gratitude for the day, or kissed his hand to the
Moon, thankful for that spectacle of loveliness passing above
him; th«man who, with reverent thankfulness or penitence,
•offers n, sacrifice of joy or grief, to express what words too'
poorly Toli ;-he is no idolater, but Nature's simple child.
We rejoice in self-denial for a father, a son, a friend. Love
f nd every atr^mg emotion has its sacrifice. It is rooted deep
in the heart of men. God needs nothing. He cannot receive ;
yet Man needs to give. But if these things are done as sub-
stitu*,o-3 for Soilness, as causes and not mere signs of recon-
ciliation with God, as means to coax and wheedle the Deity
and biibe the All-Powerful, it is Superstition, rank and
odious. Examples enough of this are found in all ages. To
take two of the most celebrated cases, one from the Hebrews,
the other from a Heathen people: Abraham would sacrifice
his son to Jehovah, who demanded that pftering ;* Aga-
memnon his daughter to angry Diana. But a Deity kindly
interferes in both cases. The Angel of Jehovah rescues
Isaac from the remorseless knife; a ram is found for a"

•A footnote in Mr. Parker's book commences thus ;-" Gen. xsii. 1-14.
The conjectures of the learned about this mystical legend, which may
tare some fact at its foundation, are numerous, and some of them remark-
able for their ingenuity. Some one supposes that Abraham was tempted by
the Etohim, but Jehovah prevented the sacrifice. It is easy to find Heathen
parallels, kc, ice."

SUPERSTITION.

" sacrifice. Diana delivers the daagliter of Agamemnon and
leaves a hind in her place. No one doubts the latter is a case
of superstition most ghastly and terrible. A father murder
his own child — a human sacrifice to the Lord of Life ! It is
rebellion against Conscience, Reason, Affection; treason
against God. Though Calchas, the anointed Minister, de-
clared it the will of Heaven— there is an older than Calchas
who says, It is a Lie. He that defends the former patriarch,
counting it a blameless and beautiful act of piety and faith per-
formed at the command of God— what shall be said of him ?
He proves the worm of superstition is not yet dead, nor its
fire quenched, and leads weak men to ask, which then has
most of religion, the Christian, who justifies Abraham, or
tho Pagan Greeks, who condemned Agamemnon ? He leads
weak men to ask; the strong make no question of so plain
a matter.

But why go back to Patriarch!* at Aulis or Moriah ; do wo
not live in New England and in the nineteenth century?
Have the footsteps of Super.^tition been effaced from our
land ? Our books of theology are full thereof; our churches
and homes, noi empty of it. When a man fears God more
then he loves him ; when he will forsake Eeason, Conscience,
Love — the still small voice of God in the heart — for any of
the legion voices of Authority, Tradition, Expedience, which
came of Ignorance, Selfishness, and Sin ; whenever he hopes
by a poor prayer, or a listless attendance at church, or an
austere observance of Sabbaths and Fast-days, a compliance
with forms ; when he hopes by professing with his tongue
the doctrine he cannot believe in his heart, to atone for
wicked actions, wrong thoughts, unholy feelings, a six-days
life of meanness, deception, rottenness, and sin,— then is he
superstitious. Are there no fires but those of Moloch ; no
idols of printed paper, and spoken wind ? No false Avorship
but bowing the knee to Baal, Adonis, Priapus, Cybele?
Superstition changes its forms, not its substance. If he "

SUPERSTITION.

" were superstitious who in days of ignorance but made his
son's body pass through the fire to his God, what shall be
said of them in an age of light, who systematically degrade
the fairest gifts of men, God's dearest benefaction; who
miike life darkness, denth despair, the world a desert, Man a
worm, nothing but a worm, and God an ugly fiend, that
made the most of men for utter wretchedness, death, and
eternal hell ? Alas for them. They are blind and see not.
They lie down in their folly. Let Charity cover them up."
Let us first consider the two cases here connected and
presented togetlier, of Agamemnon and his daughter,
and of Abraham and his son. The first, that of Agamem-
non, is brought forward admittedly for the ^jurpose of
weakening and discrediting the second. Mr. Parker in
effect argues thus :— ' The two cases are quite similar.
Tf what the man whs called upon to do in the first case
was unnatural and horrible, and therefore wrong and
unreasonable, so must the similar act which the man was
commanded to perform in the second case, be equally
condemned as horrible and unnatural. But there is no
doubt that the first was a case of superstition ghastly and
ten-ible, therefore there can be no doubt that the second
was likewise a case of superstition ghastly and terrible.*
Herein we find a very flagrant instance of that kind of
false demonstration commonly known by the term
begging the question, i. e., prejudging the subject of the
argument. The assertion that.. 'no one doubts' that

■ * In fact, the act was not actually performed or committed in either case
but Mr. Parker would probably have argued that so far as each of the men
was concerned this made no difference. In resolving or consenting to act,
the act was morally committed, and if criminal or wrong, the guilt was
incurred. In thus arguing on tliis point, we consider that Mr. Parker
would have been quite in the right.

SUPERSTITION.

which he has taken upon himself to demonstrate, argues
Mr. Parker's unmindfulness of the most necessary and
fundamental law of argument.

Agamemnon is described by Homer as a man of more
than ordinary intelligence, a great man, and a king, who
in addition to his sovereignty over his own subjects had
been elected, on account of his political sagacity and
intellectual superiority to the leadership of a confederated
expedition. Just observing that the express purpose
Homer's great Epic appears to have, is to teach by illus-
tration the necessity, in order that any great purpose
may be accompUshed, of disciplining and training the
natural will, and of bringing the sensual passions and
desires under the control of the intellectual spirit guided
by reason... We will suppose that Agamemnon, being
the man he is described to have been, and having been
informed by Calchas that God commands him to kill his
daughter, commences the series of passionate ejacula-
tions which Mr. Parker puts into his mouth. We opine
that at the third word ' murder' he would have checked
himself, paused, and begun to consider ; he might then
have proceeded in his reflections after this manner :• —

»It may be well to note that Mr. Parker might, in strictness, be called
upon to justify the ground he occupie" '^^ thus emphatically describing the
■case as that of a father murdering his own child. He appears to forget
that his basis is that of the inner consciousness of the natural man only ;
for he declines to accept the dlTJne authority of the Bible, and esteems the
Decalogue as the work of Moses or the invention of some other man. The
primary question, therefore, arises,., does the natural consciousness of man
necessarily evolve a conviction that the slaying of a child by its parent, or
of one man by another, is unnatural and horrible. To test the case by
fact, the actual behaviour of man in an intellectually primitive and bar-
barous condition would have to be investigated. Even at the present
time, acts which, to a highly civilized and educated European or American,

1
1 ) '

I i

SUPERSTITION.

' Stay.. .Is it murder? What is murder? If I were to kill
my child from want of atfection, from a desire to get her out
of the way, from avarice, to please myself or to please any
other man, that would be murder... But there is something
in this case essentially different. What is the precise case ?
Calchas informs me in the most solemn manner that God
commands me to kill my daughter: Calchas is mad; he is
not authorized to make such an unnatural demand : this is
an invention of his own. No— it is mere folly to try to
deceive myself, I know that Calchas is not mad : I have Lad
many proois which I cannot disbelieve or doubt tha^ he is
the authorized and appointed minister of Gou : I am per-
fectly sure he would not venture to deceive me. .Put it ia
unnatural, and must be wicked, to kill my own child that I
love so much.. Stay: It is the command of God.. I know
that my life as well as the life of my child is the gift of
God. .1 know that God can if he please, at any time take
away my life or her's. .1 know that I am continually in the
hands of God ; that He has been benefiting me all my life. .
I am sure that he is my friend and does not certainly wish
to harm me purposelessly. Yet I cannot understand what
good or useful purpose can be served by such an act. Noj but
then, what if I can't understand, .who is the wisest, God or
I ? Other men are not called upon to make such a fearful
sacrifice, .why should I in particular have this thing to do.
To destroy my child I No. . To kill the body is not necessarily
to kill the 8pirit...If I really believe, as I have been profess-
ing all my life to do, in the omnipotent power and love of
God, it is after all, to put the spirit of my daughter,
separated from the body by His command, into His hands'
It is a question of truthfulness and obedience; perhaps a
trial to myself and a necessary example to others. Let us

would be looked upon as unnatural and of revolting cruelty, might be, in
some parts of Africa or other countries, considered not unnatural but qjite
in order and correct under the circumstances.

SUPERSTITION. '-

see : what is the position I occupy ? I have been placed
at the head of this great expedition. I can understand that
politically and socially it is of the greatest importance to
the State that the expedition should succeed, and its purpose
be accomplished ; but there are numbers of my subjects and
others here with me who are too ignorant to understand the
matter the same as I do, who have left their homes and
property and know that they may very likely lose their
lives, for what ? In obedience to my commands and be-
cause they have confidence in my knowledge and that of the
other leaders as to what their duty to the State requires
them to do. Then am I to refuse to obey the direct com-
mandment of God because it entails a grievous sacrifice on
my part personally ; shall I not rather trust the wisdom and
providence of God and be content to do as ho commands me ?
Yes, I am no longer in doubt. It is very grievous to part
with my child and in such a manner : but Thou, O God
knowestwhat is for the best. Thy will be done.*'

Supposing this to have been substantially the reason-
ing of Agamemnon we think the decision he came to was

*Mr. Parker"? assumption of the strict similarity of the two cases obliges
us to suppose Agamemnon to have possessed a direct realizHtion of God's
Personality, and an individual confidence in His Providence, similar to
that of Abraham. If there be not such strict similarity, Mr. Parker's argu>
meut in this respect evidently fails. Nevertheless, on a more general
knowledge only, Agamemnon's consent to obey the commandment com-
mends itself as reasonable ; but the immediate grounds of his decision
would probably have been recognition of the duty of an individual to give
up his private interest or affections for the good of the State, this recog-
nition being, however, based on belief in the power, providence, and
supervision of God. His reflections might have been (in brief) as follows :
' God has commanded me by Calchas to do this thing; Can the expedi-
tion succeed without the blessing of God, or contrary to His will? No.
Is it reasonable to expect His blessing on the expedition, if I, as the leader
of the expedition refuse to obey ? Certainly not. I love my child very
much, and it will make me very unhappy ; but that is my private affair and
no justification for my refusing to do my duty.'

SUPERSTITION.

enlightened, wise, and the reverse of superstitious.
Whereas, if he had come to the opposite conclusion, on
the grounds specified by Mr. Parker, and persitfed in
refusing to obey, he would have been guilty of wilful
superstition.* In the second case, that of Abraham and
his son, we know, on evidence, that there was a distinct
recognition of God's right to make such a demand, and
an assured reliance upon His Wisdom and Power. The
purpose of the required act has been also in this case in-
directly made known to us, namely,that the spiritual sons
of Abraham, i. c, his sons by spiritual filiation, were to
become the spiritual subjects and sons of God, and,in order
that this purpose should be carried out, it was requisite
that the father or founder of the nation should prove his
perfect truthfulness and obedience by the willing (/. c,

* DeRnition of the word superHition. If the aroidance of superstition is
absolutely dependent upon knowle<{ge, or upon an enlightened understand-
ing, it ia evident that, since perfect freedom from superstition would require
perfect knowledge, the most enlightened of the human race must be very
far from having attained such a condition. But our definition of the word
assumes that a man who applies whatever knowledge be possesses reason-
ably (whether that knowledge be greater or less), is not superstitious ;
and if he act reasonably, making the right use of such light as bis know-
ledge and understanding afford him, he does not act superstitiously. The
expression, therefore, is relative and not absolute.

We would discriminate between wilful and ignorant superstition. Wil-
ful superstition comprises those cases where, the reasonable conclusion
being actually recognized by the mind, the disobedience to God, or disre-
gard of the dictates of duty, as declared by the voice of reason, is disguised
and masked under the pretense of regard for natural affection, of obedience
to traditional or conventional authority, of the claims and rights of some
deity other than the God of reason, of obedience to reason itself; in these
or any cases belonging to the same class, although a man may easily suc-
ceed in very nearly deceiving himself, and although it may be almost im-
possible for the most enlightened human being, of himself, to ^together
avoid going wrong, it ia not, strictly speaking, suRprstition, but wilful dis-
obedience.

SfPERSTITION.

readily consenting) resignation into the hands of God, of
that vvhicli was most precious and dear to liini. Tim
reality and sincerity of such trustfulness and submission
to the Will of God would be most thoroughly tested by
the commandment to sacrifice liis son, and was demons-
trated by i^braliam's '-iady obedience witliout expostula-
tion or hesitation.

Of the other examples and supposed instances of super-
stition brougiit together by Mr. Parker, some (if them,
unquestionably, are correctly denoted by that expression,
whilst others of them, on the contrary, are acts showing
a wise recognition, on the jiart of the individuals per-
forming them, of the higher spiritual relationship secured
by the promise and covenant >A God to that part of man-
kind which chooses to avail itself of the privileges belong-
ing to that relationship, by acceptance and compliance
with the conditions attached to the covenant, namely, u
willing submission to the systematic spiritual discii>line
ar d training requisite to prepare and educate the mind of
a human being for the duties essentially pertaining to the
higher sniritual existence.

An unreasoning and unreasonable fear of God as a
wrathful, malevolent, and cruel Being, requiring to be
constantly appeased and propitiated, very difficult to
please, easily provoked, unforgiving and intolerant, is
certainly superstition. It is no doubt a degraded form
of religiousfeeling, very unworthy and discreditable to the
intelligence of any educated man. To worship God with
such feeling'is undoubtedly a form of idolatry, which,
although not perhaps of the worst type, must be extre-
mely offensive to Him who has revealed Himself, alike
in the natural and the intellectual world, as the Giver

<!i!i

SUPERSTITION.

of all good gifts, merciful and gracious, slow to uiiger
and of great goodness, the guardian ami protector of the
weak and helpless, the God of Love.

Mr. Parker is fond of quoting the text which states
tliat, " perfect love oasteth out fear." '* Tiiere is, how-
ever, another text which states that, the fear of God is
the beginning of wisdom." It is not easy, indeed, to con-
ceive how there can be a distinct and direct recogni-
tion of God. . tliat is, of tlie Personality, Pow*<r, and
Oinniscienco of Gad without fear. And, although it
is not difficult to believe tiiat perfect love casts out feiir,
it is evident the bestdisposod hiiinaii mind in its niitunil
condition, *. c, uneducated, undisciplined and inexperi-
enced, must have much to go through before perfect love
becomes possible. And then perfect love of God nmst be
a perfectly reverential love, based on the intelligent
realization of the Wisdom and Power as well as on the Be-
nevolence, Sympathy, and Goodness of God toward the
human being. But " if ye love not man whom ye have
seen, how then shall ye love God whom ye have not seen."
The love of God in the human mind must necessarily
include, and be preceded by, the love of the fellow-human
being. In other words a metaphysical and indefinite love
of God as a Supreme Intelligence i-- likely to be, at
least in great measure, unreal and merely nominal ; where-
as a direct recognition of God as a Being loveable and
to be loved, is preceded by some degree of spiritual dis-
cernment, and recognition of those qualities in the
human image of God which are reflections of His Attri-
butes and Properties.

Had Mr. Parker commenced by considering the very
strong probability, looking to the circumstances and con-

HUPCaSTITlON. 89

<lition8 of human lift', tliut some revelation would be made
by God to man of knowledge hot otherwise attainable,
and had he then reflected that if any such revelation had
been addressed to human beings in all stages of educa-
tional progress and intellectual development, much of it
would be necessarily unintelligible to the less educated,
the claims of the Bible to reverential consideration might
have commended themselves to him as requiring at least
a very careful and particular investigation. But he might
have considered, moreover, that such a revelation would,
not improbably, be itself likewise progressive: each
successive portion being as much as possible adapted to
the intellectual development of the human race at the
time of its beiijg made known to them. Now in such a
compound reveliition communicated in several successive
divisions, the tnrlier portion would necessarily have re-
lation and reference to that which was to succeed it, and
as the educational condition of those wh^^ 'ad received
that earlier part advanced, an apprehension that what
they possessed was only a part, and in itself incomplete,
would naturally arise, and, hence, an increasing desire to
obtain the further revelation referred to and foreshadowed
in that which they already jtossessed.

Butiftheobjectoftherc "latiou, besides making known
the relationship of God to man in his present life, and
the laws and conditions of men's existence as the terres-
trial subjects of the Creator, was also to communicate
knowledge of a future state of existence, and of the rela-
tionship of God to the intellectual being, belonging to
that future state, it is evident that a great difficulty would
be experienced even by educated men in receiving the
knowledge and correctly appreciating the revelation, be-

SUPERSTITION.

cause, the knowledge being of a different character, ancB
differing in kind, from that belonging to the merely
terrestrial conditions of existence, could not be directly-
tested and verified by or through the senses belonging to
their natural bodies. Herein we have for consideration
a progressively developed intellectual existence in which
those appointed to teach, or who employed themselves
in teaching other men the knowledge communicated in
and by the revelation of God, would find themselves
called upon to exercise a discretionary and discriminating
power of a very responsible and serious character. They
would find that, having communicated wha^ they dis-
tinctly understood and felt quite certain about, the in-
struction of the learners was far from comp" ^te and the
information in their possession not nearly e\. isted, but
that as to the remainder they were themselves in more or
less uncertainty and doubt.

After each one endeavouring to make out for himself"
the full meaning of certain statements and communi-
cations, they would find on comparing notes that others,
apparently quite as well qualified to investigate the
matter, had arrived at conclusions altogether different. To-
successfully carry on such a work, men must act together,
the teachers would say ; let us see how far we can agree.
If we can agree as to the actual meaning of what is most
important and essential, let us combine to teach that.
And if we can agree that certain opinions and conclusions,
which some persons have put forth, are certainly wrong,,
let us unite in rejecting them. For the rest, since there'
are some statements and communications which in ther
present state of our knowledge do not appear to admit of
definite determination, let us agree to consider them in-

SUPERSTITION.

definite, and, as we have no right to withhold them al-
together, let each of us be considered at liberty to exer-
cise his individual judgment within temperate limits,
in his interpretation of them. On such a basis a great
iiumber of individual teachers can combine, appoint their
officers, arran;je their rules of discipline, and act together
in orderly and harmonious concert with all the advan-
tages of mutual support and assistance ; thus constituting
■ an intellectual organization termed in the ideal language
of the Bible . . a nation.

It is evident that teachers who, belonging to such an
organization, thereby debarred themselves from the li-
berty of teaching their individual opinions and j udgments,
and who faithfully observed the rules of the organis^ation
to which they had agreed, would be placed in a position
of considerable disadvantage if intellectually attacked in
argument, by an adversary, outside such organization,
who considered himself perfectly at liberty to adopt and
use whatever arguments and opinions might most effec-
tually serve his purpose at the moment. More particu-
larly would this be the case, however, in reference to
those items of the general doctrine which, not being able
to distinctly apprehend, they had agreed to communicate
in the sense which appeared to them most nearly that of
the revelation. For as the educational process proceeded
and knowledge became more generally diffused, and the
human mind by culture acquired greater capacity to re-
ceive and assimilate ideal knowledge of a highly intellec-
tual description, it would appear that some things which
seemed at first mysterious and unintelligible had become
susceptible of satisfactory and intelligible explanation.
The teacher who had agreed to observe the rules of the

SUPERSTITION.

organization would for a time feel himself debarred front'
teaching or accepting the new and more enlightened
explanation. After a time perhaps the Council of the
organization would agree to forego or to modify certain
of the restrictions, and the teachers would be set at
liberty to adopt the new explanation ; but, as this
would not happen until some time after those outside
had shown that the new explanation was more satisfac-
tory than the old, their adversaries might claim to have
forced the acceptance of it upon them.

Such an organization to teach religious truth derived
wholly or in part from a progressive revelation, must be^
from its nature, conservative. Whenever a case for con-
siderable alteration or modification were brought under
consideration the council would say : " Take care, we
must not be hasty in altering doctrines committed to us
by our predecesors and derived perhaps from divine in-
spiration. Is it quite certain that the nature of this case
is such and our knowledge sufficiently advanced, to jus-
tify us in giving up the old form and adopting the new ?

Certain strong charges of intellectual backwardness,
superstition, and bigotry, are brought by Mr. Parker
against ministers of the gospel. More particularly against
those belonging to that intellectual organization (nation) ^
known as the Episcopal Church. We will put before
the reader an instance quoted apparently with appro-
bation by the author of a work, recently published, en-
titled : ' The Hopes of the Human Race.' The author
of that treatise precedes the quotation by the following ob-
servations -.— " The Life after Death. (Page 107.) Div. iv..
" The moral condition of the dead is (as I have re-
marked) the one point concerning them on which the

SUPERSTITION. 43

thouglit of Christendotn has been persistently fastened.
Yet it has fixed on a view of that moral state which ori-
ginated in a comparatively dark and rude age of ethical
feeling, and must necessarily have given place long ago
to higher conceptions, were it not for the stereotyping
process by wliich the Cyclopedia of Religious Knowledge
supposed to be contained in the two Testaments has been
closed against either correction or amendment for eigh-
teen centuries. "While our clergy say as little as they
can help about the eternity of torment, we are all aware
that any serious attempt to remove the doctrine from
the Church formularies, or even to place the dogmas of the
Resurrection of the Body, and t ■ physical penalties with
which it is threatened, i' ategory of open questions,

would be met by invin,,; . .c opposition. We have con-
quered from the adherents of the Book of Genesis the
million ages of past geologic time ; but the million mil-
lions of ages of future torment in the Lake of Fire, we
have by no means won from the disciples of the Book of
the Apocalypse. They will give up almost any doctrine
sooner than this. As Theodore Parker said, they cry out
in dismay when such a thing is named — " What ! give
up Hell ? our own eternal Hell ? Never, Never, Never !"

The general answer on the part of the Episcopal
Church to this and similar attacks, is to be found in the
Psalms of David, especially in that part of the cxviii
psalm, commencing with the words : " O think upon thy
servant as concerning thy word; wherein Thou hast
caused me to put my trust."

The particular answer to the particular charge here
brought by Mr. Parker is stated, if we understand aright,
and the charge itself unwittingly refuted, by the author

SUPERSTITION.

who quotes the passage, in the words : " Our clergy say-
as little as they can." Now Theodore Parker's charge,
if we appreciate it correct! amounts to an assertion
that the clergy of the Episcopal Church retain the doc-
trine of t'verlasring torment because they wish it to be
true. Whereas the statement that "our clergy say as
little as they can," is equivalent to stating that they do
not like the doctrine, or do not wish it to be true. If
we may venture to state their case in this particular, on
the part of at least very many clergy of the Episcopal
Church, it will be in this wise :— The doctrine of ever-
lasting punislmient seems in itself to human reason
extremely improbable. It is scarcely consistent with the
Attributes of God, in which we believe. What we know of
the Love, Mercy and Power of God, would not, certainly
lead us to conjecture such a ^oom for any men or other
beings, however great tlieir sins may have been. This
is not a question, however, of conjecturing or arguing,
but of delivering a message. The doctrine seems to us to
be contained in the divine message, and we do not feel
justified in withholding it. It is a question of fact which
we cannot d.<;termine by argument. We should be re-
joiced to learn, on such sufficient authority as to justify
our acknowledgment, that no such doctrine is actually
set forth in the Bible, but until this can be satisfactorily
shown we will deliver the message as we understand it
to be given to us.

There is a favorite hymn (of modern date) in use in
the Episcopal Church, the careful perusal of which might
assist to rectify the judgment of those teachers of
Religious Philosophy who, like Mr. Parker, suppose that
ministers of the Gospel are at the present day principally

SUPERSTITION.

■concerned for the preservation and propagation of certain
antiquated dogmas in the which they themselves no
longer find any reasonable ground for belief. Not only
to the generality of clergymen belonging to the Episco-
pal Church of England and America, but also in regard
to the ministers of tLe gospel belonging to other sections
of the Christian Church ; in regard to the Roman Catho-
lic, the Presbyterian and the Wesleyan minister, we
feel sure that such a supposition is a mistalie and a mis-
apprehension of the fact. If we are right, the belief of
the minister of the gospel is, primarily, in and upon the
Ood of the gospel. Secondarily, in the Gospel because
it has been made clear to them that it is the gospel of
Ood, Assuming this to be the relationship which the
■Christian minister recognizes as existing between the
gospel and himself, it is at once evident that he cannot
feel himself at liberty to treat the coUective writings,
which constitute the Gospel, or any part of them, as he
would do a collection of merely human opinions and con-
<;lu8ion8. No doubt, very many Christian teachers, since
his time, have shared the feeling which St. Paul almost
passionately expresses, of a great preference to teach that
only of which they themselves possess a perfectly distinct
and definite knowledge and apprehension ; but they feel
sure that the actual arrangements are the wisest and
best, are content to teach to the best of their ability
that which is appointed them to tea-ch,and to wait until
what is now discerned but darkly becomes clear and
distinct under the strong light which maketh all things
manifest.

The well-known hymn to which we allude is remark-
able as not only expressing, in very beautiful language.

^i A

** SUPERSTITION.

the feeling of the earnest individual Christian, but
at the same time expressing, with equal truth and feli-
city, the feeling of the Christian Church itself, in its pre-
sent more spiritually enlightened condition, towards the
ever-present Great Teacher, Helper and Guide.

" Lead kindly Light, amid the encircling gloom,

Lead Thou me on :
The night is dark, and I am far from home,

Lead Thou me on.
Keep Thou my fe n ; I do not ask to see
The distant scene ; one step enough for me.

I was not ever thus, nor prayed that Thou

Shouldstleadme on.
I loved to choose and see my path ; but now

Lead Thoo me on. %

I loved the garish day, and, spite of fears,
Pride ruled my will : remember not paut yeara.

So long Thy power hath blest me, sure it will

Still lead me on
O'er moor and fen, o'er crag and torrent, till

The night is gone ;
And with the morn those angel faces smile
Which I hare loved long since, and lost awhile.

li-

B-

CONCLUSION.

As a philosophical writer Mr. Parker must be held
blameworthy in having omitted to bring under consider-
ation a very important part of that compound subject
which he undertook to investigate. The necessary de-
pendence of happiness, freedom, and intellectual progress,
upon willing submission to lawful authority, and, hence,
the necessity of intellectual discipline and education is
not anywhere dwelt upon or shown in his published
works.

A just law is public property, it belongs in part to
each member of the community, each one is individually,
as all are collectively, "nterested in the law being upheld
and obedience to it enforced. Evidently every command
of the supreme Ruler of the State is a law, and if the
Ruler be perfectly wise and beneficent it is necessarily a
just law; disobedience, therefore, to the command of
the lawful Ruler is an injury done to each and every
member of tiie community. A ready and willing obedience
to law requires recognition of the necessity of such
obedience, and which recognition, again, requires
education.

The proposition ' tliat freedom is dependent upon will-
ing submission to lawful authority ' would be accepted
by educated men, at the present day, as a truism or self-
evident proposition, but, not very long since, it would
have been met, even amongst educated men, by objectiou
and denial. Even now, we opine, the want of knowledge

CONCLUSION.

and appreciation of this fact by the masses of the less
educated, is a source of danger to civilization.

But men, sufficiently educat^.l to readily receive and
appreciate as true the above proposition, should be able
to understand and accept the same proposition in its
more extended and complete form . .that perfect freedom
is dependent upon a perfectly willing submission to. the
Supreme Ruler of the Universe, .in other words, to th
Will of God.

The importance of obedience, and the necessity that
obedience should be enforced and secured, becomes there-
fore manifest. The supposition that the forgiveness of
sms— of all or any sins— is simply a question of the ex-
ercise of God's mercy, (which seems to be a not ve 7
unfrequent supposition) results from an evident confusion
of ideas. If a sin be sincerely repented of, the sin ceases.
The consequences may remain, and he who committed
the sin may have to suffer for the consequences; but he
has ceased to be a sinner so soon as repentance became
real and sincere.

One great purpose of punishment is to enforce or
compel compliance with the law. To forgive in this
sense, a sin unrepented of, such as wilful disobedience to
the law or commandment of God in other words, not
to enforce obedience, would e^ dently be an injury done
to every one of God's subjects. It would be for the
Judge of the Universe to do wrong.

Another, ov the other, purpose of panishment is educa-
It is to cause the recognition of the sin and to
render that recognition distinct by making the conse-
quences more direct and palpable to the offender, and

tional.

C0NCLU8I0.V.

thereby to strengthen him against the future commission
of sin.

The supposition (which is contained in Mr. Parker's
doctrine) that the mere suffering belonging to punishment
expiates sin, meaning that the suflfering itself neutralizes
and does away with the sin, does not appear to be reason-
ably tenable. If the sin be not repented, it continues^
sin being a condition of mind which expresses itself in
the overt act when the opportunity occurs for it to do so;
it is certainly not difficult to understand that the pardon
of a sin or of sins by God, in the sense of an exemption
from any suffering as the consequences, might frequently
be the reverse of mercy ; * to the individual human-being
it would probably be the loss of a very useful and salu-
tary lesson, and, perchance, have the effect of misleading
other men into the commission of similar sins. The rela-
tion of punishment and fear to law and justice is exem-
plified in the disciplinary regulations of an army. If a
soldier, or officer of inferior ranli, refuses to obey the
lawful command of the general, he is punished. This is
held to be necessary, for otherwise the army would be-
come disorganized and suffer defeat or be rendered useless.
Is it then a reasonable conclusion that every soldier and
officer obeys the orders of his commanding officer out of
no better or higher feeling than that of a craven fear of
the punishment which he knows would be a consequence

* The effect of extreme leniency (false leniency), carried bo far as to
almost exempt the convict from actual punishment, has been in some
measure, submitted to experiment in England within the last few years,
notably so, it is said, in the prison of Millbank. Eren those who most
faTOured such a method of reformation, together with the many who would
gladly avoid the infliction of unnecessary pain, appear to be now in agree-
ment that to teach and enforce the indispensable obedience and respect to
law and order, justice absolutely requires that merited punishment should
be administered.

"^ CONCLUSION.

of hU failing ,„ „b«y, ,ve „pi„e that ,„eh co„cI„,i„„
would e certai,,!, f,.,,e. If each a„,l every ,,„„.„ Zg

perfectly„pprel,e„di„gti,e„ecea,i.y of obedience topubit
law correctly appreciating tl,e fact that l,e i, under the
contro, of hi, „„„ will, ...j thathi, „il, „„.. bee.,rc ^
n harmony „,th and submi^ion to the public law, a„,i
h»v.ng, by experience, education, and tr«i„i„„, gained,
perfect contr.1 over hiapa^iona, inclination '' fud",
ver^ness, wa, then to carry .„, in practice a resolution
to act m «r,ct conformity with the law. . p„„i„,„ent aa
« part of . e hnn.an administration of justice i„ the ^
of the world, miglit cease.

Intellectually, a ,„a„'s conclnsion, are his actions, to

h nk wrongly ,s ,„ act wrongly. For the „,ind to ;il.

Mly agree to a false judgn.ent involving criminal conse-

qnences, ,s to comn,it a cri,„e. Sin is lidently dep n-

Si ri ;';:'*"'"""• -''"^'»i«»-ance;rev«,s

git sin '*""'■""" '' "'■'""'■•''' ""^ "' "' 'Wf. a

Free-will means that the intellectual-being h,,s, by his
W.U t e unmediate control of his actions, \ut it do

jec ed to rules, regnlafons, and restraints. As alreadv
stated the unrestrained exercise of free.„i„ by ^^^1
md.v,d„als dweUing together, is a sei -evident i^I
W.ty; It «what Euclid terms an absurd snnpo^tZ
Absolute free-wiU can belong only to one Petn tTe
Iname Supreme Goven,or. But by the term aZ,
« not to be understood an unreasonable, uninteUigible
aetaphys,cal sense. There is a sense, (we say it w th

estX:rit'""'''"V'''^'''°'''°'''""^w-'»^

rertncted. It ,s, ,„ fact, a case in which, if subjected

CONCLCSrON.

•1

to the direct control of the restraining power, the thing
or existence referred to would, in the nature of things,
cease to exist. By an intellectual being, is meant an in-
dividual intelligence who possesses free wUl, i. c, has
immediate self-control, subject to lawful restraint. Now
this restraint prevents the infliction of the consequences
of the misuse of his self-controlling power, upon others,
and, perhaps, upon himself, by restraining him as far as
possible from the overt commission of sinful or criminal
acts. But if the Will of God were to actually supersede
and take the place of the individual will of the man, or
other intellectual being, and thus to cause him to act
and to do right, i dep.'udently of, and contrary to his
own individual v iition, the volition of the individual
would cease to .xist ; in fact, there would no longer be
an individual, intellectual being. Any action there might
be, would, in that case, become strictly mechanical . .
simply a manifestation of the Deity Himself. Therefore,
God may by assistance of all kinds : by counsel, instruc-
tion, the assurance of gentle and loving sympathy, by
fitern repression, by punishment.. ..exercise an almost
unlimited influence in rectifying the judgment of the
individual being, and enabling him to bring himself into
harmony with the law of goodness and truth : but, how-
ever greatly God may desire a sinner to cease to sin. He
cannot (we say it with all reverence and care) compel or
directly cause him to repent his sin and to sin no longer.
To suppose otherwise is, we opine, not to honor God, but
to confound language and reasoning, and to darken cona-
sel with misused words.

A very wise preacher ended his sermon on the vanity
of those things which usually constitute the objects of

CONCLUSION.

11 I

the desires and n.nl.itions of u,en, i„ these vvord« --u j^.^
U8 hear the conclusion of the whole matter : Fear God
and keep Hisconimandments."

Let u, conch.de this examination of the conclusion.-,
come to by writers on Religions Philosophy, by also in-
cnlcating rhe supreme in.portauce of a loving fear «nd
reverent love of God : of a willing and trustful submis-
sion to His Will : and a ready obedience to His Command-
me.... Remembering that He has given a prinmrj
Commandmn.t to each of us, each of us who by educa-
tion has become enabled, hearing, to understand the Voice
of God speaking to us by the mouth of reason : ' Of the
ft-uit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou
«ha t not eat : for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou
Shalt surely die.'

APPENDIX.

The following (|uotntion from Theodore Parker's writ-
ings, on the place actually filletl by the Bible in the past
and present time, will servo the double purpose of fur-
nishing an example of that author's eloquence uid lit.- ■ ry
ability, and a further illustration of the nc^Miaeque-
tiul character of his judgment in rejecting tL^* vUiaa of
the Bible to reverence as the inspired Word.

* " Viow it in what light wo may, the Biblo is a voiy
surprising phonomonon. In all Christian lands, this colloction
of books is separated from every rfthor, and called sacred;
others are profane. Science may differ from thorn, not from
this. It is deemed a condeaconsion on the part of its friends,
to show its agreement with Reason. How much has been
written by condescending theologians to show the Bible was
not inconsistent with the demonstrations of Newton I Should
a man attempt to re-establish the cosmogonies of Hosiod and
Sanchoniathon, to allegorize the pooms of Anacroon and
Theocritus, as divines mystify the Scripture, it would bo said
he wasted his oil and truly.

This collection of books has taken such a hold on the
world as no other. The literature of Greece, which goes up
like incense from that land of temples and heroic deeds, has
not half the influence of this book from a nation alike des-
pised in ancient and modern times. It is read of a Sunday
in all the thirty thousand pulpits of our land. In all the
temples of Christendom is its voice lifted up, week by week.
Tlw sun never sets on its gleaming page. It goes

•Vol. 1. Book IV. Ohap. 1.

! (

APPENDIX.

" equally to the cottage of the plain man and palace of
the King. It is woven into the literature of the scho-
lar, and colours the talk of the street. The bark of
the merchant cannot sail the sea without it : no ship'
of war goes to the conflict, but the Bible is there ! It
enters men's closets : mingles in all the grief and cheerful-
ness of life. The affianced maiden prays God in Scripture
for strength in her new duties : men are married by Scrip,
ture. The Bible attends them in their sickness ; when the
fever of the world is on them, the aching head finds a softer
pillow if such leaves lie underneath. The mariner, escaping
from shipwreck, clutches this first of his treasures, and keeps
it sacred to God. It goes with the pedlar, in his crowded
pack ; cheers him at eventide, when he sits down dusty and
fatigued ; brightens the freshness of his morning face. It
blesses us when wo are born ; gives names to half Christen-
dom; rejoices with us; has sympathy for our mourning;
tempers our grief to finer issues. It is the better part of our
sermons. It lifts man above himself; our best of uttered
prayers are in its storied speech, wherewith our fathers and
the patriai-cha prayed. The timid man, about awaking from
this dream of life, looks through the glass of Scripture, and
his eye grows bright; he does not fear to stand alone, to
tread the way unknown and distant, to take the death-angel
by the hand and bid farewell to wife, and babies, and home.
Men rest on this their dearest hopes. It tolls them of God
and of His blessed Son; of earthly duties and of heavenly
rest. Foolish men find it the source of Plato's wisdom, and
the science of Newton, and the art of Eaphael ; wicked men
use it to rivet the fetters on the slave. Men who believe
nothing else that is spiritual, believe the Bible all through ;
without this they would not confess, say they, oven that there
was a God.

Now for such effects there must bo an adequate cause.
That nothing comes of no',''ng is true all the world over.

APPENDIX.

" It is no light thing to hold, with an electric chain, a
thousand hearts though but an hour, beating and bounding
with such fiery speed. "What is it then to hold tho Chris-
tian world, and that for centuries? Are men fed with chaif
and husks ? The authors we reckon great, whose word is in
tho newspaper and the marketplace, whose articulate breath
now sways tho nation's mind, will soon pass away, giving
place to other groat men of a season, who in their turn shall
follow them to eminence, and then oblivion. Some thousand
famous writers come up in this century, to be forgotten in
tho next. But tho silver cord of the Bible is not loosed, nor
its golden bowl broken, as time chronicles his tijns of cen-
turies passed by. Has the human race gone mad ? Time
sits as a refiner of metal ; the dross is piled in forgotten
heaps, but tho pure gold is reserved for use, passes into tho
ages, and is current a thousand years hence as well as to-
day. It is only real merit that can long pass for such.
Tinsel will rust in tho storms of life. False weights are
soon detected there. It is only a heart that can speak, deep
and true, to a heart ; a mind to a mind ; a soul to a soul ;
wisdom to tho wise, and religion to the pious. There must
then bo in tho Bible, mind, conscience, heart and soul, wis-
dom and religion. Were it otherwise how could millions
find it their lawgiver, friend and prophet? Somo of the
greatest of human institutions seem built on the Bible ;
such things will not stand on heaps of chaff, but moun-
tains of rocks.

What is the secret cause of this wide and deep influence ?
It must be found in the Bible itself, and must be adequate
to tho effect. To answer the question wo must examine tho
Bible, and see whence it comes, what it contains, and by
what authority it holds its place. If we look superficially,
it is a collection of books in human language, from different
authors and times; we refer it to a place amongst other
books, and proceed to examine it as tho works of Homer

^^ APPBNDIX.

and Xenophon. But the popular opinion bids us beware, for
we tread on holy ground".

After writing thus, however, Mr. Parker proceeds to
examine the Bible precisely as he would do other books
quite regardless, apparently, of the caution given by po-
pular opinion.* What does he find? Considered as a
possibly divine revelation, he finds everything different
to what he would have it :-Narrative and History, where
he would prefer Natural Philosophy-prophecies and
psalms, figurative language and allegory, where he would
l.ke to have plain and simple statements in the most de-
finite forms of ordinary language; wonders and miracles,
where he would rather have only the laws of Nature;
God communicating directly, and particularly, with men,
as God of the materia world and absolute King of men,
where he feels sure the only correct manner in which
God could or can communicate with His human creatures,
18 indirectly, and generally, through the imier conscious-
ness. Consequently, he is "forced to conclude that the
Bible is a human work, as much as the Principia of New-
ton or Des Cartes, or the Vedas and Koran." But how
is this conclusion to be reasonably reconciled with what
has just preceded it?

• Let the reader note the case here between Mr. Parker and popular
opm.oa. In effect popular opinion cautions him thu3:-There is sufficient
eridenceth^t the boolc is entitled to reverence. The matters treated of
m it are such R3 no man can inrestigate . his own Icnowledge. Don't
try to critici.8 or examine the book the same as though it were a merely
human production, if you do, harm only will come of it. Mr. Parker
then, disregarding the caution, proceeds to subject the Bible to the critical
analysis of a learned man, self-reliant confident in his own knowledge and
ability not only to pass judgment on the book, but to set it aside and sub-
Btitute his own individual judgments and opinions. How stands the case ?
If Mr. Parker confounds himself, is not popular opinion justified ?

APPENDIX.

But the above quotation will serve also another purpose,
namely, as the manly and sincere testimony of one hostile
to the claims of the Bible as a divine revelation, that it
has actually up to the present time fully served its in-
tended purpose as such, assuming it to be the inspired
Word containing the divine Revelation.

The following will serve to illustrate that theory
according to which the Creator, having at first provided
certain laws for regulating the material world, called
laws of nature, has thereby debarred Himself from
exercising control over, modifying, or in any way inter-
fering with those laws.

"A little while ago there came the cholera, scaring the
world. Men attributed it to the ' wrath of God,' begged
that dear Father «to withdraw his hand,' thinking Him
meddlesome and ill-tempered: Men had been ignorantly
violating some of the natural conditions of bodily well-
being, nay, of bodily existence. If we went on so we should
all perish and the race die out. The disease brought pain
and death, plainly telling us of our mistake and our conse-
quent danger ; bidding us avoid the special cause of that
mischief. Would it have been well for the Infinite Provi-
dence to alter for our caprice the constitution of the universe
and the pro-established harmony between nature and the
frame of man ? The public prayers changed not the pur-
poses of God, nor His motive, nor His moans. But the
boai-d of health swept the cholera out of many a town.

Man is sick, he prays for health. Shall God abolish the
pain, or leave man to find out and remove the causes of his
body's grief and sock medicine to palliate the disorder."

* Vol. XI. (Div. ix.) Page 194.

APPENDIX.

The question whether public and private prayer is or
is not answered, and the petition of the prayer some-
times directly granted, is a question of fact to be decided
by experience and evidence. Yet under ordinary or
usual circumstances direct evidence cannot, from the
nature of the case, determine the question with abso-
lute certainty. If, for example, a man, being sick,
prays that his health may be restored, and from that
time commences to recover, he would probably con-
clude that his prayer had been answered, but an ob-
jector might argue : " Oh no, you are quite mistaken !
it is simply the consequence of the medicine you took,
or, if you took no medicine. Nature must have ral-
lied and thrown off the disease ; your prayers certainly
could not have anything to do with your recovery."
Now, when a question belonging to complex phenomana
has to be decided by the experience of a number of obser-
vations made by a great number of obsen^ers ; if a
large majority, say eight or nine out of ten, agree that
the evidence suffices to answer the question in the affirm-
ative, it is scarcely reasonable for the minority, say one
or two out of ten, to assert positively that the correct
answer to the question is in the negative.

In the foregoing quotation Mr. Parker speaks of public
prayers being oiTered up. The fact of public prayers being
offered up, evidences that all those who joined in them
belonged to the party whose experience agreed that the
petitions of those who so prayed were sometimes granted.
If we are not mistaken, the particular occasion referred
to in the above furnishes a very strong and, to many
persons, startling instance of evidence contradicting Mr.
Parker's assertion. Writing from memory, we believe

rayer is or
yev sonib-
be decided
rdinary or

from the
rith abso-
eing sick,
from that
lably con-
it an ob-
mistaken !
you took,

have ral-
I certainly
•ecovery."
henom3na
r of obser-
srs ; if a
igree that
the affirm-
ff say one
lie correct

i of public
yers being
d in them
d that the
3S granted,
n referred
to many
icting Mr.
e believe

APPENDIX. 6b

the circumstance to have been as follows : — In England
during the visitation of cholera, referred to by Mr. Park.r,
the mortality, in the city of London especially, having
become very great, public prayers were offered up on the
same day in all the churches. A few days afterwards
public attention was called to the fact, notably in T/te
Times newspaper, in which the circumstance was dwelt
upou as very noteworthy and remarkable, that up to the
very day on which the pra^cra were offered up tlie mor-
tality had steadily increased day by day ; but on the day
succeeding that on which the prayers were oflered up, a
very marked decrease in the numbers had taken place, and
which decrease up to that time— of the publication of the
article in The Times— had steadily continued. After
which time, we may add, the decrease in the numbers
continued and became more rapid until the cholera left
the country.

On a much more recent occasion, when public prayers,
not only in England, but throughout tlie British Empire,
were ofiered up ; the day of prayer was not very long
afterwards succeeded by a thanksgiving day. We might,
perhaps, safely assume that great numbers of those who
joined in the thanks on the latter day, did so with the
conviction that their prayer had been answered and their
petition granted.

• If wo remember rightly, the figures showing the precise daily mortality
before and after the prayer-day, were given in The Times article.

* I *

> • • •

• 1 1 <