On this page
-
Text (1)
-
I Jtjwe 16 * 1855.] THE LEADER, 583
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
The Church Asd Phh.Osoph* » Fsance. Uegl...
Man at Rome . M . Lanfrey , cold and cultivated ,, it may be , not yet exer- cisod to mental suffering , has no mercyon the terrible yearnings ofthe human heart after the unknown—he laughs at the philosophy which treat * _nfct only of the " here" but of the " hereafter ;"—no respect for enthusiasm . The c onvulsionists , who exhibited some of the most remarkable phenomena of . our mental and physical nature , are , in his eves , nothing but " une canaille ehontee" —a shameless rabble ;—no appreciation of the simple statement of the theory of a religion of the heart . He calls the sentence , " In vain do we cry to Grod , ' Father , Father , ' if it be not in the spirit of charity that we cry , " an " inoffensive platitude , " a " saying of La Palisse drawn up in beatic style , " and so forth . His volume is full of similar extravagances , an : I yet he is praised by unqualified admirers for his moderation . We have chosen to notice his doctrine , before describing his work , in order to get rid of the disagreeable part of our business first . We have to add that the value of his historical views is diminished by the fact that he applies , with amusing perseverance , to all the personages whose character he has to appreciate , one single criterium by which to estimate their facul- ties and their morality — especially their faculties . He who most dis- believes in Christianity is with him the greatest man ; because he has noticed that some of the greatest of modern men have been disbelievers . Even Montaigne is slightly depreciated , because it is not quite certain that I he had made up his mind to reject all Catholic doctrines . Bayle , whose dis- I belief is ardent , laid down a principle which ha _^ " enfante le monde moderne , " " the world" being of course put for France . Montesquieu is admitted I to be " une ame d _' _clUe , " only because " there is a mark of interroga- I tion secretly put at the end of his most resolute affirmation . " Voltaire 1 " an exaggeration partly to be explained by the _extravagant and odious attacks I of the priestly party—is spoken of almost as a god . ° M . Lanfrey castigates I De Maistre for alluding to his physiognomy as a Christian might a % las- 1 phemer for insulting the person of Christ : yet certainly he was comparable I in personal graces to the Cardinal Dubois , whose " monkey countenance" is considered a fair object of remark ( p . 120 ) . We arc the last to refuse I our gratitude and respect to the claims of the greatest pioneer of intel- I lectual freedom , to the admiration of posterity . But Voltaire himself , who 1 insulted everything respectable , from Joan of Arc to characters which even I those who do not believe / admire , would hardly have claimed to be treated I by his disciples with the pious respect reserved for saints . He was too f _ao-oressive to be spared j ° M . Lanfrey ' _s opinions of men are often still more strangely biassed . We ( sometimes almost doubt that he is serious . " The death of the Abh 6 Ter- \ rasson , " he says , » was in itself worth a long life . " Then he relates that j when a man of the church presented himself before him to receive his last ' confession , this exemplary character said to him , " Sir , ask Madame Luquet ! ( his housekeeper ) , she knows all . " The confessor insisted . « Come , sir , i have you been luxurious ? " "Madame Luquet , have I been luxurious ? " j inquired the patient . " A little , M . l'Abbe , " replied she . " A little , " re- ! _pc-ited the patient . Verily a long life is worth not much if it is worth only that . The anecdote would read well in Boccaccio ; it is singularly out of ! place in these pages . But it is in the appreciation of the English philosophers and the progress of the English mind that M . Lanfrey—less sure of his ground—applies his j criticism with the sternest obstinacy . Our revolution is an " explosion of fanaticism under Cromwell . " Hobbes , our great sophist , is accused of 5 endeavouring to establish religions " sur u ? ie base , inebranlable _^ by \ mistake toppled them over altogether ; Locke is treated with very little j respect because under strong suspicion of not beino- an anti-Christian . By \ an inconceivable train of reasoning he is described as the continuator in < politics of the work of Hobbes , and as a " narrow and superstitious Anglican , " ¦ ; t _, i . _, _„ ' o , _, „ . . * , _, . Pr _, . ' because he speaks seriously of Sirens , and of the reasonable parrot of Prince 0 Maurice ! After tins , is it , we are asked , astonishing that he could for a < moment have supposed that Faith and Reason may be brought into agree- _1 ment ? We shall not , however , follow M . _Lanfrey further upon this ground , j I which he has evidently traversed hastily . Our observations , which he will [ at once perceive are not written within the citadel of any dogma , tend to j make these truths evident—that men must not be classed according to the i Opinions they profess , not be raised or lowered because _tln'y do or do not ; belong to a particular school , and that it is quite as possible for the wisest of | men to be i Christian after a certain manner as for the most uncompro- J • / . . 1 i . i _ t . | mising free thmker to be an idiot ! The intemperances of M . Lanfrey , however , do not prevent us from | admiring his book , which contains much that is interesting and valunble , __ aim ' ¦ ¦ is written almost throughout with singular perfection . In his main object , ] also , we cordially agree . He desires to enfranchise the country he loves | from the dreary tyranny of priests and bigotfl ; he is an eloquent preacher in favour of toleration . Ilu maintains tho doctrine , which has low advocates on I our side of the water because it is more generally admitted , that Government I and legislation have no business whatever with the objects of man ' s con- science ? that the Jew and the Maho . nedan , the Catholic , the Protestant , the ; ci .. ' 1 _., . _,. . _,, ,, ' ... i , . _., „ , _,:,, _, , 1 TW i i w . : o Sceptic and the Atheist arc all equally entitled to their _opimons , and he is , especially vigorous in defending the conquests of Keason , _boc-ause ho thinks he knows certainly what they are , and that they arc infallibly true , l _. is account of the long struugle of free thought with authority is preceded by a remarkable _chapter , in which he proves—for the first f iinc irrefragnbly , from documents not yet consulted—that the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes was no political act , but the direct work of the Church . It was bought for money from Louis XLV . The Assembly General of the Clergy , Which used to meet every five years , refused subsidies witli periodical perti- nacit y , until its distinct de . na . uls for persecution were complied with . _^ c _tavo no space to enter into the narrative , but ean only _s » y , that any history Of that remarkable act-the disgrace of Franco an well as of the Monarchy i and the Church-which _ignorefs the _docuuxonts brought forward by M . Lanfrey , must always bo incomplete . . . , _^ ,, _* . . The remaiiulor of his work , though less novel in its facts , is full of _mgonious thought and -brilliant writing . Few recent works are better Worth y of notice ; nnd indeed wo loam , to tho credit of the French public , _ttat it has already made considerable noteo as well in the salons as in the press .
: CHRISTIAN _LTFK _« , _« _- „ _, ¦ ., _< , . r ¦ _,-,,.., r -r > « . _« «*•**** _Mfe . _SocialandIndividual By Peter Bayne , M . A . TT Edinburgh : James Hog * _Untit . we saw the present work we were quite unacquainted with it author . s . name ; having read it , we feel bound to say that Mr . Bayne is a : _acquisition to the cause of Orthodoxy , and may be esteemed and enjoye < ° y tno . who are not orthodox , likewise . He must not be offended , how eve . r ' " _we say that his book owes an immeasurable debt to the very writer ag . ainst wnom _i * is directed : in every page of it the influence of Carlyle i _snming hke the sun in water . Yet Mr . Bayne thinks all the leading doctrines o Carlyle great errors ; he protests against his hero-worship , —against his viev ° _* philanthropy , —against his aspect towards Liberalism . At best , he _seemi to esteem _^ m as an indirect , unrecognisable aid to the good cause—a blinc Samson to be employed against irreligious Philistines—rather than as a trustwor _^ y spiritual guide and leader . We can accept no such view of course " ut we can . cheerfully say that Mr . Bayne writes with kindliness , _reverence an < _^ p ropriety—that nothing can be more removed from the provincia dieacity an < i dissenter pertness of the " Eclipse of Faith "—inasmuch as Mr -Bay 116 writes not only with literary elegance , but like a Christian and like i gentleman . ¦ Mr' _Bavile once more tries a fall with the giants of new philosophy in the cause of tIae old faith . He sees , thoroughly , whence and how that faith is threatened . He sees that society cannot exist without a religion , and thai the existing forms of religion at present are in a very questionable condition In the first P art of hls work he deals with what he recognises to be the mosi im P ortant solution of the great question—how religion is to be brought ink renewed activity in life again—offered by the thinkers outside of th < Chur 1 ' In the seco _, ' he exhibits m a series of essays , pictures of the live : _™ ld _J"bours of notable Christians of recent times , —Wflberforce , Howard D . r " Arnold , for instance , —and thus deals both speculative _^ and _prMXtwatt _; _£ lth hls subject . How to answer Carlyle-that is one _thing which Mi Bayne professes to teach ;—how to live a pure life in the ancient faith—is th second 7 tlun S wh ' ch _| by elaborate portraiture , he labours to show . The mos original aspect of Mr . Bayne s book is , that he combines with faith in dogma a ver _^ hIgh appreciation of all that is newest , freshest and best , among th _< opponents of dogmas . We may add that , but for _tlie soleinnity of the subject " 1 S _relatlon towards Carlyle would be afmost amusing . He is steeped in th < Carlylian influence j he has learned to paint in the Carlylian studio : he cannot s . hake ° _f the magical efi _^ ect any way . But Le protests , he argues , he dccla » ns against the Carlylian doctrines ! In all tins we see a generous _spirit _? ° P _£ r _?™ re _™ e whe j ; e it cannot agree . We are much mistaken if _^ _^ _>' s orthodox friends will take as kindly to it . We fear that the honesty of his book wiU prevent its being popular . Like Lady _^ azle _^ he will have to " sacrifice his virtue in order to preserve his reputation . __ _ . . _ . . + 1 L f _" s now hear Mr . Bayne speaking for himself . Viewing Pantheism _aa the fundamental basis of Carlyle ' s hero-worship , he thus expounds his views of it , and puts forth his reply :-hero-worship an erroneous doctrine . my . Carlyle cares little for metaphysical supports for his opinions ; he has long listened to the gTeat voices of life and history ; but we tliink his early works afford us the philosophic explanation of his doctrine of hero-worship . On a pantheistic scheme of things , it seems unassailable . God being all , and all being God , and a great man being the highest visible manifestation , and as it were concentration of the universal divine essence , it is right to pay to the latter the homage of an unbounded admiratio » ' to reuder him the only kind of worship possible to men . Put _^ m _™ no Z \ _*> . . ? \ 5 _/ , i _™ m ? P ° _"ii : \ ! _SmSon and voices of history and the heart . We find him tracing all -worship to admiration ana rcverenc 0 for _/ eat men wo mul hiin a 8 Sertmg that the limits are not to be fixed for the _vonc . _raiion with which to regard true heroism in a man . We think the very word « hero-worship" utterly inadmissible under any interpretation ; we assert , that no re-;( jion erer had its origin in the admiration of men . _Stich the point in dispute ; we turn to history . Two great classes may be distinguished among the leaders of mankind ; those who have exercised their influence by power not moral , and those who made an appeal to the moral nature of man . We contend not for hair-breadth distinctions ; we point out a difference which one glance along the centuries will show to be real and broad-By the _fn-st _chiss , we mean such men as Napoleon , _^ Y _^ _IT'T _^ _aVwI second , such men as Mahomet , Zoroaster , and Moses . Jlie lormer were , viewea as we now regard them , mere embodiments of force ; their soldiers trusted and followed th beom , so arn , ies were in their hands as thunderbolts . The captain of banditti , w ] , OiS 0 evc flUos farther , and whose arm . smites more powerfully , than those of his fol-OWCI . S ) exorcises an influence in kind _pivciaely similar . Anything analagous to worship is foreign to every such case ; a fact rendered palpable and undeniable by the simple reflection , that there is no feeling of an infinite , respect , as due to what is infiinto , in these or the like instances . A supple-kneed Greek might have knelt to Alexander , " if Alexander wished , " but no proclamations could make a Greek l »« Hove that _Alexander could lay his hand on the lightning , or ¦ impart hie to an _™™\ _*™™ _« , l «» v « v _« r _, . mother class of great men with whose ; _" _" S _2 j has _hci'ii ever and intimately connected : this wo _Jwiyc represented uy ""' u" _« i mw md Mos < M _ H $ thu il ) t ftt issuf ! ooin < , s ( lh ,., ( iy before us . Worship dU { ori inuUi m uach of thcs 0 cnHOH _ Whenco . did it urine ? Mark the men in thoir work _) nnd H ( . ) cu tQ tUeir wordiJ . Mahomet au . se . and sm . I , " Yo have been _wors hipping dum | , idols that , arc no gods : look up to Allah ; lh »> w in " ° _&' d hut AUllhl 11 _^ wor (| . s _weronot in vain . Zoroaster arose and said , " Yo liavu _wainlon-d from the truth whi « . _; h your fathers knew and followed ; I bring you it buck fresh from the lountaina of heaven . " Men gave ear to him also . Moses _winui to th « clnlilroii ot _laraoi ana said , "I Mi hath sent me unto you . " They l .. ; nnl _tlio won am o lowcu nun , through tli _. cloven surges , into the ' » ' _^ _'" _!^ Whom did men obey ami _wornlnp ... <•«<• 1 . « \ w _^\ l _^ J * tho y conimi ! _ndmontH of when h « pointed Ins hnger _upwar , h _« All . 1 . _^ i »« l Jht _{ d \ _rilwd wonla under the _^ _^ _J' 3 ;' 11 , ? _^ lli _v' " s !« iv 1 n y ay with _Sinncsn and certainty , No . It _^ _Yv « r _Uu ! _Senlr tlm (/ _X _U'Sped _^ K _... th _' o ho _..., it _was the belief in hi , alliance with a » cxto . ior , an inlini u _, _i-uwer , which won l . imhiH m < luoncc ; n _" « »»«» m . OUKht us ilru froin heaven ! W . uh , in all ages , has _Ixxui the cry ol m * _. n , as mcy iookl _., i thoir Uy _«« radiant , with joy and _tlmiikfuliioHw _, on _"" ' P » o « t «» r P ™ 1 » 1 ( 1 ' _« «™* mnt , ed _tlio . n _« olv «« i .. i < l « rhiH _« " _!««»»«•«• Tlu - « row » _» _' "' a _^ 1 > tT ° _riVi _' _Tto 11 _^ 0 _^ 0 highly honoured , and _¦»<»»« . loyally obeyed , have « lw « y _« beo .. bolu . v « d to _^ _uavo _^ c mo down from _koavuu ; men have not _worshipped tho nplnl ol a mun , or tno _uroutu hi
I Jtjwe 16 * 1855.] The Leader, 583
I _Jtjwe 16 * 1855 . ] THE LEADER , 583
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), June 16, 1855, page 7, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/sldr_16061855/page/7/
-