the correctness of the Apostle's view; and that is, the observation that
his mind had not escaped the prevalent error of the primitive church,
the belief, namely, that the second coming of Christ would shortly
occur, until which time, he tells them, this feast was to be kept.
Elsewhere he tells them, that, at that time the world would be burnt up
with fire, and a new government established, in which the Saints would
sit on thrones; so slow were the disciples during the life, and after
the ascension of Christ, to receive the idea which we receive, that his
second coming was a spiritual kingdom, the dominion of his religion in
the hearts of men, to be extended gradually over the whole world.
In this manner we may see clearly enough how this ancient ordinance got
its footing among the early Christians, and this single expectation of a
speedy reappearance of a temporal Messiah, which kept its influence even
over so spiritual a man as St. Paul, would naturally tend to preserve
the use of the rite when once established.
We arrive then at this conclusion, _first_, that it does not appear,
from a careful examination of the account of the Last Supper in the
Evangelists, that it was designed by Jesus to be perpetual; _secondly_,
that it does not appear that the opinion of St. Paul, all things
considered, ought to alter our opinion derived from the evangelists.
One general remark before quitting this branch of the subject. We ought
to be cautious in taking even the best ascertained opinions and
practices of the primitive church, for our own. If it could be
satisfactorily shown that they esteemed it authorized and to be
transmitted forever, that does not settle the question for us. We know
how inveterately they were attached to their Jewish prejudices, and how
often even the influence of Christ failed to enlarge their views. On
every other subject succeeding times have learned to form a judgment
more in accordance with the spirit of Christianity than was the
practice of the early ages.
But it is said: "Admit that the rite was not designed to be perpetual.
What harm doth it? Here it stands, generally accepted, under some form,
by the Christian world, the undoubted occasion of much good; is it not
better it should remain?"
II. This is the question of expediency.
I proceed to state a few objections that in my judgment lie against its
use in its present form.
1. If the view which I have taken of the history of the institution be
correct, then the claim of authority should be dropped in administering
it. You say, every time you celebrate the rite, that Jesus enjoined it;
and the whole language you use conveys that impression. But if you read
the New Testament as I do, you do not believe he did.
2. It has seemed to me that the use of this ordinance tends to produce
confusion in our views of the relation of the soul to God. It is the old
objection to the doctrine of the Trinity,--that the true worship was
transferred from God to Christ, or that such confusion was introduced
into the soul, that an undivided worship was given nowhere. Is not that
the effect of the Lord's Supper? I appeal now to the convictions of
communicants--and ask such persons whether they have not been
occasionally conscious of a painful confusion of thought between the
worship due to God and the commemoration due to Christ. For, the service
does not stand upon the basis of a voluntary act, but is imposed by
authority. It is an expression of gratitude to Christ, enjoined by
Christ. There is an endeavor to keep Jesus in mind, whilst yet the
prayers are addressed to God. I fear it is the effect of this ordinance
to clothe Jesus with an authority which he never claimed and which
distracts the mind of the worshipper. I know our opinions differ much
respecting the nature and offices of Christ, and the degree of
veneration to which he is entitled. I am so much a Unitarian as this:
that I believe the human mind cannot admit but one God, and that every
effort to pay religious homage to more than one being, goes to take away
all right ideas. I appeal, brethren, to your individual experience. In
the moment when you make the least petition to God, though it be but a
silent wish that he may approve you, or add one moment to your life,--do
you not, in the very act, necessarily exclude all other beings from your
thought? In that act, the soul stands alone with God, and Jesus is no
more present to the mind than your brother or your child.
But is not Jesus called in Scripture the Mediator? He is the mediator in
that only sense in which possibly any being can mediate between God and
man--that is an Instructor of man. He teaches us how to become like God.
And a true disciple of Jesus will receive the light he gives most
thankfully; but the thanks he offers, and which an exalted being will
accept, are not _compliments_--commemorations,--but the use of that
instruction.
3. Passing other objections, I come to this, that the _use of the
elements_, however suitable to the people and the modes of thought in
the East, where it originated, is foreign and unsuited to affect us.
Whatever long usage and strong association may have done in some
individuals to deaden this repulsion, I apprehend that their use is
rather tolerated than loved by any of us. We are not accustomed to
express our thoughts or emotions by symbolical actions. Most men find
the bread and wine no aid to devotion and to some, it is a painful
impediment. To eat bread is one thing; to love the precepts of Christ
and resolve to obey them is quite another.
The statement of this objection leads me to say that I think this
difficulty, wherever it is felt, to be entitled to the greatest weight.
It is alone a sufficient objection to the ordinance. It is my own
objection. This mode of commemorating Christ is not suitable to me. That
is reason enough why I should abandon it. If I believed that it was
enjoined by Jesus on his disciples, and that he even contemplated making
permanent this mode of commemoration, every way agreeable to an eastern
mind, and yet, on trial, it was disagreeable to my own feelings, I
should not adopt it. I should choose other ways which, as more effectual
upon me, he would approve more. For I choose that my remembrances of him
should be pleasing, affecting, religious. I will love him as a glorified
friend, after the free way of friendship, and not pay him a stiff sign
of respect, as men do to those whom they fear. A passage read from his
discourses, a moving provocation to works like his, any act or meeting
which tends to awaken a pure thought, a flow of love, an original
design of virtue, I call a worthy, a true commemoration.
4. Fourthly, the importance ascribed to this particular ordinance is not
consistent with the spirit of Christianity. The general object and
effect of this ordinance is unexceptionable. It has been, and is, I
doubt not, the occasion of indefinite good; but an importance is given
by Christians to it which never can belong to any form. My friends, the
apostle well assures us that "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink,
but righteousness and peace and joy, in the Holy Ghost." I am not so
foolish as to declaim against forms. Forms are as essential as bodies;
but to exalt particular forms, to adhere to one form a moment after it
is out-grown, is unreasonable, and it is alien to the spirit of Christ.
If I understand the distinction of Christianity, the reason why it is to
be preferred over all other systems and is divine is this, that it is a
moral system; that it presents men with truths which are their own
reason, and enjoins practices that are their own justification; that if
miracles may be said to have been its evidence to the first Christians,
they are not its evidence to us, but the doctrines themselves; that
every practice is Christian which praises itself, and every practice
unchristian which condemns itself. I am not engaged to Christianity by
decent forms, or saving ordinances; it is not usage, it is not what I do
not understand, that binds me to it--let these be the sandy foundations
of falsehoods. What I revere and obey in it is its reality, its
boundless charity, its deep interior life, the rest it gives to my
mind, the echo it returns to my thoughts, the perfect accord it makes
with my reason through all its representation of God and His Providence;
and the persuasion and courage that come out thence to lead me upward
and onward. Freedom is the essence of this faith. It has for its object
simply to make men good and wise. Its institutions, then, should be as
flexible as the wants of men. That form out of which the life and
suitableness have departed, should be as worthless in its eyes as the
dead leaves that are falling around us.
And therefore, although for the satisfaction of others, I have labored
to show by the history that this rite was not intended to be perpetual;
although I have gone back to weigh the expressions of Paul, I feel that
here is the true point of view. In the midst of considerations as to
what Paul thought, and why he so thought, I cannot help feeling that it
is time misspent to argue to or from his convictions, or those of Luke
and John, respecting any form. I seem to lose the substance in seeking
the shadow. That for which Paul lived and died so gloriously; that for
which Jesus gave himself to be crucified; the end that animated the
thousand martyrs and heroes who have followed his steps, was to redeem
us from a formal religion, and teach us to seek our well-being in the
formation of the soul. The whole world was full of idols and ordinances.
The Jewish was a religion of forms. The Pagan was a religion of forms;
it was all body--it had no life--and the Almighty God was pleased to
qualify and send forth a man to teach men that they must serve him with
the heart; that only that life was religious which was thoroughly good;
that sacrifice was smoke, and forms were shadows. This man lived and
died true to this purpose; and now, with his blessed word and life
before us, Christians must contend that it is a matter of vital
importance--really a duty, to commemorate him by a certain form, whether
that form be agreeable to their understandings or not.
Is not this to make vain the gift of God? Is not this to turn back the
hand on the dial? Is not this to make men--to make ourselves--forget
that not forms, but duties; not names, but righteousness and love are
enjoined; and that in the eye of God there is no other measure of the
value of any one form than the measure of its use?
There remain some practical objections to the ordinance into which I
shall not now enter. There is one on which I had intended to say a few
words; I mean the unfavorable relation in which it places that numerous
class of persons who abstain from it merely from disinclination to the
rite.
Influenced by these considerations, I have proposed to the brethren of
the Church to drop the use of the elements and the claim of authority in
the administration of this ordinance, and have suggested a mode in which
a meeting for the same purpose might be held free of objection.
My brethren have considered my views with patience and candor, and have
recommended unanimously an adherence to the present form. I have,
therefore, been compelled to consider whether it becomes me to
administer it. I am clearly of opinion I ought not. This discourse has
already been so far extended, that I can only say that the reason of my
determination is shortly this:--It is my desire, in the office of a
Christian minister, to do nothing which I cannot do with my whole heart.
Having said this, I have said all. I have no hostility to this
institution; I am only stating my want of sympathy with it. Neither
should I ever have obtruded this opinion upon other people, had I not
been called by my office to administer it. That is the end of my
opposition, that I am not interested in it. I am content that it stand
to the end of the world, if it please men and please heaven, and I shall
rejoice in all the good it produces.
As it is the prevailing opinion and feeling in our religious community,
that it is an indispensable part of the pastoral office to administer
this ordinance, I am about to resign into your hands that office which
you have confided to me. It has many duties for which I am feebly
qualified. It has some which it will always be my delight to discharge,
according to my ability, wherever I exist. And whilst the recollection
of its claims oppresses me with a sense of my unworthiness, I am
consoled by the hope that no time and no change can deprive me of the
satisfaction of pursuing and exercising its highest functions.
September 9, 1832.
* * * * *
The influence of Transcendentalism on general literature can be only
indicated in loose terms. Its current was so strong, that like the
Orinoco rushing down between the South American continent and the island
of Trinidad, it made a bright green trail upon the dark sea into which
it poured, but the vehemence of the flood forbade its diffusion. The
influence was chiefly felt on the departments of philosophy and ethics.
It created the turbulent literature of reform, the literature born of
the "Enthusiasm of Humanity," the waves whereof are still rolling,
though not with their original force. The literature of politics was
profoundly affected by it; the political radicals, philosophical
democrats, anti-slavery whigs or republicans, enthusiasts for American
ideas, prophets of America's destiny, being, more or less wittingly,
controlled by its ideas. In this department Parker made himself felt,
not on the popular mind alone, but on the recognized leaders of opinion
East and West. The writings of Sumner and his school owe their vigor to
these ideas. In history Bancroft was its great representative, his
earliest volumes especially revealing in the richness, depth, and
hopefulness of their interpretations of men and measures, the faith in
humanity so strongly characteristic of the philosophy he professed.
In poetry the influence is distinctly traceable, though here also it was
confined within somewhat narrow limits. Bryant betrays scarcely
perceptible marks of it, though he ascribed to Wordsworth a fresh
inspiration of love for nature. It is hardly perceptible in Longfellow,
whose verse, bubbling from the heart, gently meanders over the meadows
and through the villages, gladdening daily existence with its music.
Neither Bryant nor Longfellow had the intellectual passion that
Transcendentalism roused. The earlier pieces of Lowell, the anti-slavery
lyrics and poems of sentiment, were inspired by it. Whittier was wholly
under its sway. The delicious sonnets of Jones Very were oozings from
its spring. Julia Ward Howe's "Passion Flowers," though published as
late as 1854, burn and throb with feeling that had its source in these
heights.
The writers of elegant literature, essays, romances, tales, owed to
Transcendentalism but a trifling debt, not worth acknowledging. They
were out of range. It was their task to entertain people of leisure, and
they derived their impulse from the pleasure their writings gave them or
others. It was not to be expected that authors like Irving, Paulding,
Cooper, would feel an interest in ideas so grave and earnest, or would
catch a suggestion from them. But Lydia Maria Child, whose "Letters from
New York"--1841, 1843--were models in their kind; whose stories for
young people have not been surpassed by those of any writer, except
Andersen; whose more labored works have a quality that entitles them to
a high place among the products of mind, is a devotee of the
transcendental faith. A very remarkable book in the department of
fiction was Sylvester Judd's "Margaret; a tale of the Real and the
Ideal; Blight and Bloom." It contained the material for half a dozen
ordinary novels; was full of imagination, aromatic, poetical,
picturesque, tender, and in the dress of fiction set forth the whole
gospel of Transcendentalism in religion, politics, reform, social
ethics, personal character, professional and private life.
As has been already remarked, the transcendental faith found expression
in magazines and newspapers, which it called into existence, and which
no longer survive. Its elaborate compositions were, from the nature of
the case, few; its intellectual occupancy was too brief for the creation
of a permanent literature. Had Transcendentalism been chiefly remarkable
as a literary curiosity, the neglect of the smallest scrap of paper it
caused to be marked with ink would be culpable. As it was, primarily and
to the end, an intellectual episode, turning on a few cardinal ideas, it
is best studied in the writings and lives of its disciples. They knew
better than any body what they wanted; they were best acquainted with
their own ideas, and should be permitted to speak for themselves.
Earnest men and women no doubt they were; better educated men and women
did not live in America; they were well born, well nurtured, well
endowed. Their generation produced no warmer hearts, no purer spirits,
no more ardent consciences, no more devoted wills. Their philosophy may
be unsound, but it produced noble characters and humane lives. The
philosophy that takes its place may rest on more scientific foundations;
it will not more completely justify its existence or honor its day.
THE END.
INDEX.
A.
Alcott, Bronson, contributes to "The Dial," 133;
on the transcendental philosophy, tribute to Emerson quoted, 246;
the mystic, 249;
a follower of Pythagoras, 251;
"_Concord Days_" quoted, 255;
a leader of the transcendentalists, 257;
school in Cheshire, Conn., 262;
school in England named for, 267;
presides at reform meetings in England, 272;
superintendent of schools, 275;
his conversations, 283;
writings of, 358.
Alcott, Wm. A., writes on physical training, 262.
Alexandria, school of, 61.
American Unitarian Association, tract published by, 120.
Aristotle, categories of, 111.
Arius, advocate of Unitarian philosophy, 109.
B.
Bacon, Lord Francis, Macaulay on his philosophy, 139.
Bain, principles of the sensational philosophy stated by, 205.
Bancroft, George, his account of Herder, 47;
History of the United States quoted, 117;
champion of the spiritual philosophy, 117, 118;
traces of transcendentalism in his historical writings, 381.
Barni, Jules, translates Kant into French, 61.
Bartol, C. A., belongs to the transcendental school, 341.
Baur, follower of the Hegelian ideas, 186.
Biblical repository, articles on transcendentalism in, 137.
Bibliotheca Sacra, article on transcendentalism in, 92.
Biographia Literaria, of Coleridge, quoted, 82;
criticised by Edinburgh Review, 91;
Wordsworth's poetry considered in, 97.
"Blithedale Romance," published by Hawthorne, 175.
Blodgett, Levi, nom de plume of Theodore Parker, 125.
Boehme, Jacob, doctrine of, 257.
Boston Quarterly Review started by O. A. Brownson, 128.
Bouillet translates Plotinus, 61.
Brisbane, Albert, disciple of Fourier, 156.
Brook Farm, the experiment at, 157;
constitution quoted, 159;
mode of life there, 164-169;
breaking up of the society, 170.
Brooks, C. T., makes translations from German authors, 56;
German lyrics translated by, 116.
Brownson, Orestes A., description of, 128;
converted to Romanism, 131;
writings, 358.
Bruno, Giordano, founder of the Dynamic System, 81.
Bryant, Wm. C., transcendental spirit not found in his writings, 381.
Butler fights against infidelity in his _Analogy_, 185.
C.
Cabanis, philosophy of, 63;
skeptic of the 18th century, 187.
Cabot, Eliot, contributes to "The Dial," 133.
Calvin, denies doctrine of consubstantiation, 364.
Cambridge Divinity School, address before, by James Walker, 121-123.
Carlyle, Thomas, interprets the German thinkers, 52;
quoted, 52;
translates Wilhelm Meister, 56;
opinion of Coleridge quoted, 77-92;
change in his mode of thought, 94;
the preacher of transcendentalism, 103;
articles on Richter and German literature, 116.
Chalybaeus, his verdict on Jacobi quoted, 25.
Channing, Dr. William, not a transcendentalist in theory, 111;
feeling toward Christ, 111;
letters of, quoted, 112;
transcendentalist in sentiment, 113;
quoted, 113;
contributes to "The Dial," 133;
tribute to Alcott, 259;
judgment of Margaret Fuller, 293;
writings of, 350.
Channing, William Ellery, writings of, 340.
Channing, Wm. H., version of Jouffroy published, 116;
contributes to "The Dial," 133;
writes on social topics, 330;
works of, 336;
as an orator, 338;
writings of, 360.
Chapin, E. H., speaks against capital punishment, 337.
Chauvet, on philosophy of the ancients, 61.
Cheever, Geo. B., article in N. A. Review, 92.
Cheshire, Conn., school at, 262.
Child, Lydia Maria, a writer of the transcendental school, 382.
Christian Examiner, account of Herder in, 47;
article by F. D. Hedge in, 92;
article by James Walker in, 120;
articles on transcendentalism in, 137;
review on Emerson in, 138.
Clarke, James Freeman, edits De Wette, 116;
contributes to "The Dial," 133;
judgment of Margaret Fuller, 293;
an early transcendentalist, 343.
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor, influence of Schelling on, 40;
the prophet of transcendentalism in England, 76;
his studies in Germany, 79;
on Schelling's works, 80;
alleged plagiarism from Schelling, 81.
Coleridge, Biographia Literaria, quoted, 82;
the true founder of the Broad church, 89;
described by Talfourd and Hazlitt, 90.
Coleridge, Carlyle's verdict on, 92;
his sympathy with German literature, 96;
the philosopher of transcendentalism, 103;
makes Lessing's works familiar, 116;
article on by Mill, 206.
Coleridge, Sarah, note by, in Biographia Literaria, 88.
Communism in Massachusetts, 157.
_Concord Days_, by A. B. Alcott, quoted, 246.
Condillac, doctrine of, 62;
skeptic of the 18th century, 187.
Congregationalists, followers of Schleiermacher among, 50.
Constant, English translations from, by Geo. Ripley, 116.
Consubstantiation taught by Luther, 364;
denied by Calvin, 364.
_Consuelo_ translated by F. G. Shaw, 329.
Copernicus revolutionizes astronomy, 10.
Cousin, Victor, philosophical works of, 61;
French follower of the Scotch school, 66;
his system of philosophy, 67-75;
English translations from, 116;
philosophical miscellanies noticed by the press, 117.
Cranch, C. P., contributes to "The Dial," 133;
lines from, quoted, 146;
writes for "The Harbinger," 330.
Curtis, Geo. Wm., writes for "The Harbinger," 330.
D.
Dana, Chas. A., writes for "The Harbinger," 330.
Degerando, lectures on Kant's philosophy, in Paris, 115.
Descartes, doctrine of innate ideas ascribed to, 15.
De Wette, students of, in the United States, 116;
Theodor and Ethics, English edition of, 116;
living faith in God aided by, 121.
D'Holbach, skeptic of the 18th century, 187.
Dial, the, publisher's letter on Herder, 47;
Tribute to Wordsworth in, quoted, 97-99;
articles in, 132;
writes for, 133;
ancient scriptures printed in, 135;
article on Margaret Fuller in, 176;
contains account of English reform meetings, 273.
Digby, Sir Kenelm, story related by, 199.
Dietetics, theory and practice of, introduced by transcendentalists, 150.
_Discourses on Religion_, work by Schleiermacher, 48.
Dwight, J. S., makes translations from German authors, 56;
edits selections from Goethe and Schiller, 116;
contributes to "The Dial," 133;
quoted, 148;
writes musical articles for "The Harbinger," 330.
Dynamic system, the, begun by Giordano Bruno, 80.
E.
Eckermann's conversations with Goethe translated into English, 116.
Edinburgh Review contains article by Carlyle, 52;
criticises Biographia Literaria, 91.
Edwards, Jonathan, spirit of his writings, 108.
_Elements of Psychology_, work by C. S. Henry, published, 75.
Emerson, Charles, contributes to "The Dial," 133;
articles quoted, 222.
Emerson, R. W., edits Carlyle's Miscellanies, 93-116;
on Wordsworth, 99;
an idealist, 115;
retires from the ministry, 120;
publication of "Nature," 122;
essays published, 127;
quoted, 142;
edits "The Dial," 132;
lecture on transcendentalism quoted, 135;
lecture on "The Reformer" quoted, 153;
address before Divinity College, 200;
tribute paid by Tyndall to, 214-243;
appreciation of by German readers, 218;
published works, 224;
works quoted from, 228;
letter to his church, 232;
judgment of Margaret Fuller, 285;
sermon of, reprinted, 363.
Encyclopaedists, influence of, in France, 187.