The panic caused by the revolutions of 1848 gave increased stimulus, by

adding a political reaction to the religious. The extreme rationalist

party had favoured the Revolution, and the school of Schleiermacher had

supported the schemes for constitutional government. In the suppression of

liberty which ensued for about ten years, the orthodox movement in

theology united itself with the reaction in political. Absolute government

was not merely a fact, but a doctrine. The theological reaction was no

longer the spiritual aspiration of Germany seeking repose after doubt, but

a political movement veiled under an ecclesiastical colour. The result has

been, the creation of a Lutheran party far more extreme in its opinions

than the one just described;—the political leader of which in the Prussian

parliament was the jurist Stahl;(856)—intolerant towards other churches,

suspicious of any independent associations for religious usefulness in its

own, disowning pietism because of its unchurchlike character, and in its

principles going back beyond the Reformation, discarding the subjective

inward principle, and reposing on the objective authority of the church.

Taking a political view of religion, it does not so much ask what is

truth, but what the church asserts to be true. Though not offending

popular prejudices by the introduction of Romish doctrines or rites, it

really reposes on the Romish principle of a visible authoritative church

with mystical powers, upholding a rigid sacramental theory and the

doctrine of consubstantiation. Extending the sacramental efficacy to the

ministerial office, and denying communion between God and the individual

soul independently of the church as the element of communication.(857) Yet

it contains many honoured names, and has produced many instructive works.

The movement in English theology, which originated a generation ago in the

panic caused by the liberal acts of the government which was introduced by

the reform act,(858) offers a parallel; with the exception that the

ecclesiastical principles then advocated had always had supporters in the

English church, whereas they were nearly new in the Lutheran. The Lutheran

movement too, only proposes to go back to the Reformation, the English

ecclesiastical movement professed to go back to the early fathers. (41)

While the church has thus attempted a renovation of itself in doctrine,

the value of which some will dispute, all will allow thankfully that there

has been a deep increase of spiritual life throughout the German churches.

Religion indeed had never died out; but in the retirement of country

districts(859) the flame of divine love still burned with unextinguished

glory. This spiritual fire has now spread, and expressed itself in acts of

earnest life. Foreign missions have been promoted;(860) an inner or home

mission established for schools, and other religious agency;(861) and an

annual ecclesiastical diet(862) constituted, for promoting co-operation

and ecclesiastical improvement.(863)

These three separate movements of the present age, even when incorrect,

have contributed something to form a perfect theology. In the orthodox

school we see the attempt to return to the Bible, as interpreted by the

Reformation; in the mediation school, as interpreted by the religious

consciousness; in the critical school, as interpreted by historic and

critical methods.

We have now completed the history of the great movement in German

theology, in its two elements, doctrinal and critical. Commencing in the

first period,—in doctrine, with the disbelief of positive religion,

replacing dogma by ethics; and in criticism, supplying a rationalistic

interpretation: in the second, it was improved on the doctrinal side by

the separation of religion and ethics; and on the critical by a spiritual

acknowledgment of the literary characteristics and psychological

peculiarities of revelation: in the third, by a total reconstruction of

both inquiries, in a more historic and orthodox spirit; and by the

creation of a traditionalist position in reference to each. The solution

of the problem how to reconcile faith and reason, was attempted in the

first by obliterating faith; in the second by uniting them; in the third

by separating them. The whole movement stands remarkable, not only as

being the most singular instance in history, where the action of free

thought can be watched in its intellectual stages, disconnected in a great

degree from emotional causes, and where the effort was exercised by the

friends of religion, not by foes; but also in the circumstance that though

referable to the influence of similar intellectual causes as former epochs

of free thought, it is characterised by wholly different forms of them.

We have found, on nearer inspection, as might be anticipated in any great

movement of mind, that instead of being without purpose, and a mere heap

of ruins, there was a plan and method in it. It is a history which offers

much cause for sorrow and much for joy. Though, as has been before

remarked, a period of harrowing doubt in the life of an individual or a

nation is a melancholy subject for consideration, yet when it is not

induced by immorality, but produced, as in this instance, by the operation

of regular causes, and is the result of the attractiveness of new modes of

inquiry which invited application to the criticism of old truths, to be

accepted or rejected after being fully tested; there is something to

relieve the dreariness of the prospect. And when we look to the result,

there is abundant cause for thankfulness. The agitation of free thought

has produced permanent contributions to theology. Extravagant and shocking

as some of the inquiries have been, and injurious in a pastoral point of

view, being the utterance of men who had made shipwreck of faith; yet in a

scientific, hardly one has been wholly lost, and few could be spared in

building up the temple of truth. In criticism, in exegesis, in doctrine,

in history alike, how much more is known than before the movement

commenced: and what light has been thrown on that which is the very

foundation problem, the just limits of inquiry in religion. Each earnest

writer has contributed some fragment of information. At each point error

was met by an apologetic literature, rivalling it in learning and depth;

reason was conquered by reason; and though we cannot help rejoicing that

we are able to reap the results of the experience, without undergoing the

peril of acquiring it, yet we must acknowledge that the free and full

discussion has in the end resulted in truth: the very error has stimulated

discovery. So far from being a warning against having confidence in the

exercise of inquiry, it is an unanswerable ground for reposing confidence

in it.

Christianity is not a religion that need shrink from investigation.

Christians need not tremble at every onset. Our religion is vital, because

true; and we may place trust in the providence of God in history, which

overrules human errors and struggles for the permanent good of men; and,

extricating the human race from the follies of particular individuals,

makes the antagonism of free discussion the means to conserve or to

promote intellectual truth.

In concluding this sketch however it is proper to make a few remarks, as

hints to theological students, in reference to the study of works of

German theology. Many such works are translated, and many more exist in

the original, which are of the highest value,(864) and are likely to be

read, and indeed may justly be read, by all students of large cultivation.

The works of Schleiermacher or Dorner in doctrine, of De Wette or Ewald in

criticism, of Neander or Baur in history, are works of power as well as

erudition, and contain a treasure-house of information and suggestion for

those who know how to use them wisely, and separate the precious from the

untrue. While I have endeavoured to present a fair history of the whole

movement, I should feel inexpressible pain if these remarks were the means

of leading unwary students to plunge unguardedly into the study of many

parts of it. Its original connexion with the deist and ethical points of

view, and the constant sense of living in an atmosphere of controversy,

have impressed even some of the more orthodox writers with a few

peculiarities, of which a student ought to be made aware:—for example,

with a slight tendency to a kind of Christian pantheism; a disposition to

reduce miracle to a minimum; and in the department of Christian doctrine

to consider Christ’s life as more important than his death, and to regard

the atonement as an effect of the incarnation, instead of the incarnation

being the means to the atonement.

If then a young student would avoid a chaos of belief, and pursue a

healthy study of the German writers, there are two conditions which he

ought to observe. First, care should be taken to understand the precise

school of thought which his author represents, in order to be able to

allow for the possibility of prepossession in him;—a remark true in

reference to all literature, but especially important in that which marks

a particular phase of controversy. Secondly, a student’s duty to English

society, and to the church of which he is a member—as also, I humbly

venture to think, to his own soul—requires that he shall first listen

thoughtfully to the vernacular theology of England. Let him learn the

chief affirmative verities of the Christian faith before meddling with the

negative side. Let him master the grand thoughts or solid erudition of

Hooker and Pearson; of Bull, and Bingham, and Waterland; of Butler and

Paley;—the seven most valuable writers probably in the English church;—and

then reconsider his opinions by the light of foreign literature. Each one

of us is on his intellectual as well as moral trial. None whom duty calls

need be afraid to encounter it in God’s strength, and with prayer to

Christ for light and truth and love.

-------------------------------------

It remains to mark the influence produced by German theology on free

thought in other countries. (43)

In the remainder of this lecture we shall carry on the history of free

thought in France, from the point at which we left it(865) down to the

present time. We shall find that the open attacks on Christianity of

former times have ceased. There, as elsewhere, the present century has

been constructive of belief in spiritual realities, not destructive; but

the reconstruction has in some cases been so connected with an abnegation

of revelation, that it merits some notice in a history of free thought.

The speculative thought in France during the present century has

manifested itself chiefly under four forms:(866) (1) a sensational school,

called in the early part of the century Ideology, in the latter

Positivism: (2) a theological school, which has attempted to re-establish

a ground for reposing on dogmatic authority: (3) a social philosophy,

which has directed itself to the study of society and labour: and (4) the

eclectic philosophy, created by German thought, which has sought to

reconstruct truth on the basis of psychology. The chronological sequence

of these schools connects itself with the political sequence of events,

and has altered with their change. We must trace them briefly in

succession, in order to understand their religious influence and

tendencies. The first has tended directly to atheism, the second to

superstition, the two last indirectly to pantheism.

When treating of Volney in a former lecture, we noticed the philosophy

which took its rise amid the ruins caused by the revolution. Christianity

was replaced by materialism, theism by atheism, ethics by selfishness. The

philosophy of Cabanis, of Volney, and of De Tracy,(867) was founded so

entirely on a physical view of human nature, that it could hardly aid in

any way in instilling nobler conceptions. Society grew up without the

belief of God or immortality; but in this very poverty the system met its

downfall. The deep yearnings of the human heart craved satisfaction. The

inextinguishable poetry of the soul yearned for the spiritual; the

devotional instincts of human nature caught the first notes of that

heavenly melody to which they were naturally fitted to be attuned.

Literature rather than religion was the source from which the mind of

France began to imbibe the deep and spiritual conceptions which

obliterated the materialism of the revolution. The spiritual tone of such

a writer as Chateaubriand,(868) similar to that of the Romantic literature

of Germany, awakened in France early in the century the conceptions of a

world of spirit, of chivalrous honour, of immortal hope, of divine

Providence; and led mankind to feel that there was something in them

nobler than mere material organism; even a spirit that yearned for the

world invisible. Chateaubriand showed,(869) in answer to the school of

Voltaire, that Christianity was not merely suited to a rude age, but was

the friend of art, of intellect, of improvement. The church as yet

possessed only little influence. Beginning to revive under the fostering

influence of Napoleon, who saw clearly the necessity of cultivating

religion, its moral usefulness was lessened by falling under the suspicion

of opposing the public liberty, when patronised by the government after

the re-establishment of the monarchy.

The nobler conceptions just described, whether they arose from literature

or from religion, gradually penetrated into the minds of thoughtful men;

and, the ground being thus prepared, several rival systems of thought

gradually sprang up in the fifteen years (1815-1830) of the restoration of

the Bourbon dynasty. Accordingly, when the revolution of 1830 gave freedom

to France, there was a universal activity of mind, and free thought

assumed a bolder attitude; sceptical, if compared with the Christian

standard, but embodying deep moral convictions, if compared with the

unbelief of the last century. Among the definite schemes of philosophy,

theoretical or practical, which were proposed for acceptance, the first

which we shall notice was Socialism.(870)

It originated with St. Simon.(871) The stirring events of the great

revolutionary era, together with the social philosophy of Rousseau which

preceded it, had directed attention to the philosophy of social life. St.

Simon had lived through this period, and early in the present century

devoted himself to the study of schemes of social reform; and shortly

before his death in 1825, announced his ideas as a new religion, a new

Christianity. In the ferment which followed the revolution of 1830, the

opinions of this dreamer became suddenly popular, and, enlisting around

them some distinguished minds, forced themselves on the attention of the

public during the two following years; and as the political schemes which

resulted from them have left their mark on the theological literature of

the time, they merit some attention.

St. Simonism offered itself as a system of religion, of philosophy, and of

government, which should be the perfect cure of all the evils which

existed. The source of these evils St. Simon conceived to be the want of

social unity; individualism, selfishness, to be the cause of virtual

anarchy. He considered that philosophy and religion had striven in vain to

remedy the evil, because they had not made the spiritual to bear upon the

material interests of mankind. This, which was the true remedy, he

proposed to discover historically.

Borrowing the thought of the German philosophers, he sought it in the

elements which are to operate on human nature in the progress of its

development. The mode of development by which society advances to

perfection he found in a supposed law, that society shows two great

epochs, which in long cycles alternate,—the organic and the critical; the

former, where the individual is obedient to the purpose of the society;

the second, where the individual rises against it. He found two instances

of them in the ancient and modern world respectively, viz. in the ancient

pagan period and its disruption; and again in the Catholic centralization

of the middle ages, and the disorganization which succeeded from the time

of the Reformation to the French revolution. He considered himself to be

raised up to announce the dawn of the third organic period, the world’s

millennium, a new epoch, and a new religion. It was to be the realisation

of the fraternity, which the great moral teachers of the world had

promised and prepared. This religion consisted in raising the industrial

classes, by a scheme which it is irrelevant to our purpose to explain.

Contemporaneously with this socialist system was that of Fourier,(872)

which, though presented more as a scheme of social amelioration, and less

as a religion, implied the same abnegation of Christianity. Starting from

an avowedly pantheistic view of philosophy, the author of it gradually

passed through the sciences, until he arrived at man, and reached the

study of human history and constitutions. Exaggerating the good elements

of human nature, and ignoring the necessity for any other than a social

power to amend the heart, he traced the source of evil to social

competition, and proposed to rearrange society on the principle of

substituting co-partnership for competition.(873) The two ideas

accordingly which these speculations introduced were;—first, that European

society was approaching a crisis, the peculiarity of which, as distinct

from former ones, would be, that it would be an industrial revolution; and

the industrial mind would obtain the mastery of the administration; and,

secondly, that the accompaniment would be a new organization of industry

on the principle of co-operation. We cannot track these schools into their

ramifications(874) and their indirect expression in lighter

literature,(875) nor notice the levelling system of communism or

co-operative socialism which completed the cycle;(876) but it will be

remembered, that when the revolution of 1848 ensued, the schemes for

organization of labour were one of its peculiarities; the social republic

of those who regarded the democracy as a means, mixed with the political

republicans, who thought it to be an end.

It will be noticed that the schemes of these socialist philosophers,

though analogous as political theories, in proposing organization of

labour and consequent monopoly, to the English socialism of Owen before

named, are unlike it in philosophical origin and religious tendency. In

philosophical origin his system rests on sensation, theirs on feeling; his

degrades human nature, theirs elevates it. His denounces priestcraft as

imposture, and religion as obsolete; theirs, though identifying religion

and industry, regards religion as the highest expression of humanity, the

great goal to which nature is developing: his leads to deism or atheism,

theirs to pantheism. Yet theirs is not less hurtful, for they reject with

contempt the dogmatic teaching of revelation, though they appropriate the

Christian virtues; like the German philosophy they resolve the Deity into

a law, according to which the universe evolves.

One of the minds however which was trained in the school of St. Simon,

viz. Comte,(877) has developed a system known by the name of Positivism,

which in its effects is not merely thus negative, but amounts to positive

and dogmatic unbelief. He showed traces of the school from which he

sprang, both in considering politics to be the highest science, in

regarding humanity as a progress, and in adducing individualism as the

sole cause of social evil and anarchy. He commenced similarly by taking an

estimate of the present state of knowledge, and seizing the law which

presides over the progress of knowledge.(878) This law he stated as

consisting of three stages, through which each science passes as it grows

to perfection; the first, the theological or imaginative stage, wherein

the mind inquires into final causes, and refers phenomena to special

providence; the second, the metaphysical, wherein the idea of supernatural

or personal causes being discarded, it seeks for abstract essences; the

third, the positive, wherein it rests content with generalized facts, and

does not ask for causes.(879) The first in its religious phase is

theistic; the second pantheistic; the third atheistic. The perfection of

science consists in reaching the third stage, wherein the knowledge is

strictly generalized from sensation. Having thus seized the law which

presides over intellectual development, and settled the limits of the

human reason to be confined to phenomena, agreeing in this respect with

the ideologists, and opposed to Cousin, he next offered a classification

of the sciences, commencing with the simplest, and showing that, as the

mind passes from the simple to the complex, the methods of investigation

multiply; accompanying his account by a delineation of the steps in each

case by which science attains perfection; and thus gradually ascending to

the science of man(880) and society, to which the preliminary

investigation had been the preface, designed to prepare the way for

showing how the science of society may be similarly brought into the

positive stage.

Such is the scheme of Comte. The very breadth of it possesses an

attraction; and if viewed merely as a logic of the sciences, it may justly

command attention. Many of the analyses which he supplies of the methods

and history of science are masterly; and his generalisations, even when

hasty, are fertile in suggestion. He was a most original and powerful

thinker; scientific rather than artistic. But his philosophy, viewed as a

whole, is a grand system of materialism which is silent about God, spirit,

personal immortality; diametrically opposed to Christianity, in that it

makes man’s social duty higher than his individual, science the only

revelation, demonstration the only authority, nature’s laws the only

providence, and obedience to them the only piety; and destroys

Christianity by destroying the possibility of its proof. In later life

this distinguished man, feeling the unutterable yearnings of the religious

sentiment, and the necessity that his philosophy should afford

satisfaction to them, invented the system of religion developed in his

catechism;(881) in which, in a manner analogous to that employed by

Feuerbach or St. Simon, he regarded the collective humanity as the true

God, the proper object of worship and reverence; and marked out a church

and a cult, the caricature of the Catholic church, in which the world’s

heroes should receive canonization. The probability of mental derangement

palliates the absurdity of this system in the originator, but throws the

burden of responsibility from the master upon those who are insane enough

to adopt it.

We have traced two of the schools which flourished in the second quarter

of this century. Another remains, which has incurred from opponents the

charge of pantheism, viz. the idealist school, commonly called the

Eclectic; (44) which was especially dominant in France, and in the

university of Paris, during the rule of the Orleans dynasty. Viewed as a

philosophy it is a very noble one. Implying, as its name denotes, an

attempt to reap the harvest of the industry of all preceding schools of

philosophy, it was the chief means of restoring intellectual and spiritual

belief to France, and of creating the great movement of historical study

which marks that period of French literature. Commencing with a reaction

against the materialist and sensationalist school, it sought, by imitating

the mode by which Reid had refuted the philosophical scepticism of Hume,

to find a method for restoring belief in spiritual realities; and

afterwards, when its chief leader Cousin(882) had been exiled to Germany,

he brought back an acquaintance with the successive speculative schools

which existed there.

History of Free Thought in Reference to The Christian Religion · 第 23 / 51 段