On this page
- Departments (1)
-
Text (6)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
. r*yT 3Ltt£rfltttr£» 0
-
Untitled Article
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.
Untitled Article
One of the most striking features in the recent development of philosophic thought in Prance is the opposition arising within the hosom of the Church to the Catholic champions of the reaction , especially the two most celebrated , M . de Bonald and Count Joseph de Maistke . Of the two other distinguished men whose names were originally associated with the reaction , Lamennais soon abandoned the side of authority he had at first espoused to unite himself
with the people , and Chateaubriand had but little real influence , his plea in favour of the old regime being sentimental and aesthetic rather than political or philosophical . Bonald and Maistre , however , devoted themselves heart and soul to defend the extremest claims of absolutism in politics , and authority in religion . They were both , in different ways , not only men of great power , but also of extensive personal influence , and the effect of their vigorous polemic against the claims of reason and the advocates of progress was for a time considerable . Count Joseph de Maistre , a nian of society and of the world , taking a prominent part in public affairs , possessing lively passions , an immensely active and acute , though not profound , intellect , and writing in the easy , brilliant , paradoxical way so popular in Erance , became the political and literary
champion of the reaction , while M . de Bonald , devoted- more to abstract pursuits , and fond of metaphysical refinements that often indeed impede the free action of his naturally powerful mind , undertook the defence of authority from the philosophic side . Each congratulated himself on the successful result of his labours , JVL de Bonald , in particular , evidently believing that by his celebrated theory of traditionalism he had overthrown , in the most unanswerable way , the claims of free inquiry , and finally established the principle of authority over every department of thought and life . Nevertheless , the great cause for which they thus contended is already lost . How ,
indeed ,, could it be otherwise ? How is it possible , with any logical chevauxde-frise , however cunningly fashioned , to keep back the rising tide of free opinion ? It must advance equally against the authority of the monarch of thought who would stay its progress—the Canute upon the-shore—and the senile fury of the unreasoning bigot— the Mrs . Partington of opinion- —who stands on the margin , broom in hand , angrily beating back the waves . The riews of Bonald and Maistre , which , even during their lifetime , made little real progress beyond the circle of their own followers , are now abandoned by the Church in Whose interest they were advanced ; the leading opponents of traditionalism , Father Chastel and the Abbe Maret , being both ecclesiastics
of ability , position , and influence . This singular ecclesiastical reaction in favour , if not of rationalism , at least of the rights of reason and free inquiry against the exclusive pretensions of authority , forms the subject of two able papers by M . de Remus at in the cur . rent numbers of the Revue des Deux Mondes . The heading of these papers is Traditio 7 ialisme , a term which M . de ReMUSat employs to designate in general the ideas and arguments , the whole polemic , in fact , of all who in philosophy , politics , or religion , tend to exclude the free use of reason ; the first article being devoted to M . Dia Bonald , who may fairly bo taken as the ablest and most consistent representative of the class . Certainly , in his ingenious theory touching the origin of language , he has carried the principle of
authority to the utmost possible extreme . According to this theory , tradition is the one key that explains all the mysteries of human science and human life . The essence of his theory , which is , however , not always clearly seized or consistently kept in view even by himself , is as follows : All knowledge , all science and art , all law and government , all human life , in fact , depend ou thought—thought depends on language , which is of divine origin , being in fact originally communicated to man dh-cctly from his Maker , and thus a divine tradition . In the nature of the case , man can never discover or invent anything , hia very reason being the result of tradition—he thinks only on authority . This doctrine at onco settles all the central questions ever
agitated by philosophers or divines . It decides in the simplest manner the philosophic question touching the origin of knowledge . This must not bo looked for in sense or understanding , in reason or experience , the truo source of all scieuoo being tradition . It settles the fundamental question of politics touching the origin of government and the source of power , which is iiot to bo found amongst the nobles or the people , but ever resides in an individual , who holds it in virtue of a divine tradition , and is himself tho cmbodimont or representative of tho divine authority . All government ia thus theocratic . Tho thoory obviously decides nil religious questions in tho samo way , religion being in fact ; simply a tradition which tho Church preserves and you aoccpt . To talk about
tho excroiso of reason in any department of intellectual or moral activity , is in fttofc simply an absurdity . A roaotion from such un oxtrcmo view was obviously inevitable , though we should hardly have expected it to proceed in tho first instance from tho Churoh herself . Tho recent philosophical representatives of Catholicism , however , taking a more profound view of tho whol < 5 question , have decided that their predecessors , in their zeal to prove tho oaso to tho ut most , proved too much . In thoir anxiety to destroy everything but tho Church , the Church itself did not escape—they undermined tho very ground on which tlicy stood . If reason is destroyed , there is nothing to which the Church can appeal , no foundation £ > n which it can build . Accordingly , Father Giiabtkl ,
at the outset of his work , De la raletir de la Raison , a temperate , but , at the same time , spirited and philosophical attack on the whole doctrine of Traditionalism , says pertinently that M . deBonald ' s views leave to society no-alt etna tive between blind fanaticism and hopeless scepticism . He undertakes to vindicate the outraged rights of reason , and in doing so exposes , without pity , the numberless self-contradictions and paralogisms running through M . de Bonald's -writings . The Abbtf Maret helps forward the same work in his Philosophic c ( Religion ; and as his fellow-labourer opposes Bonald chiefly on philosophic grounds , so the Abbe attacks him on the side of authority , proving that the very tradition winch is with him the test of truth , contradicts the leading propo . sitions of his system . The second article , devoted to M . de Maistre and the recent works of his powerful opponent , M . Bordas Demoulin , we cannot attempt to aualvze but would earnestly recommend both to the attention of all who arc interested in the progress of religious and philosophical thought .
Untitled Article
Two dignitaries of the Second Empire have lately been lost to France—M . Vieillard , the old and early friend of Louis Napoleon , and M . be Pastohet , who after having served for years as tutor and guardian to the Comte de Cham ' bord , accepted , with a mysterious suddenness , the pay and trappings of a Napoleonic . Senator , to the disgust and surprise of all honourable Legitimists . A veteran member of the French Academy , now lying dangerously ill , on hearing of these two deaths , exclaimed , Ah ! mon Dieu , je vais mourir corn me Notre Seigneur , eittre deux larrous .
Untitled Article
ROMANY RYE . The Romany Rye : a Sequel to Lavengro . By George Borrow , Author of ' The Bible in Spain , ' &c . &c . 2 vols . Murray , Mb . Borrow is perfectly justified in making war upon gentilit y , since he is unquestionably the most unconventional writer of the presentage . Theobjecte of his special detestation are the Pope and the critics , and lie attacks both after the most ferocious fashion . What he says of his Holiness is considerably too long to be quoted , and so , indeed , is his opinion of the critics ; but when he conies to speak of the manner in which he would like to dispose oi them , he has a pretty little passage which we think worth extracting : he will hold them up , he says , "by their , tails , wriggling , blood andfo-im streaming from their broken jaws . " In these classical expressions Mr . Borrow does nothing more , however , than express his disgust for those
who find fault with his books . It is an extremely offensive practice , and we quite sympathize with Mr . Borrow—or , rather , we should if he were not so well able to defend himself . . , . The object of The Roman // Ui / e it is extremely difhcult to discover . It appears to be part of a narrative which will probably never be terminated , till Lavengro has solved the great problem , whether he has a soul or not . Every now and then , two or three volumes vritt make their avatar in this world of critics , to whom they will reveal all that Mr . Borrow may have in the meantime discovered about the genesis of popery . "We like his fancy of deriving his Holiness from the Dalai Lama ^ But he attributes to Buddhism an antiquity wbich its most celebrated J alapoins do not claim for it In fact , it is only the reformed religion of llindostan . About six hundred years before Christ , Brahmanism was nearly stifled beneath mountains of rites nnd ceremonies , fables and legends . Buddha , the
Luther of northern India , entered his protest against the corrupt system , and introduced a religion far more purc and humane than that which it undertook to overthrow . Mr . Borrow , however , is extremely hostile to reformed Hindooism , because he believes the I ' ope and tho Cardinals to hive been "iven by it to the West . While he is in great strength upon this topic , he introduces a concise dissertation on the word Amen , winch he derives front the Hindoo formula , Omani Vatsiklioin . This strongly reminds us of Voltaire ' s epigram , in which he shows how Alfana came from Lquus . \\ u should have thought it more rational to derive Amen from the Arabic word Ameen : that is , ' Have mercy on us ! ' . 11111 But enough of this . There arc very capital scenes in the book betmu-n tho hero and gipsies . Tho author bus a good deal ol humour , by tho hep of which he often makes us laugh . His very prejudiced render him
minising . He hates the Scotch excessively , which is surprising , considering «« » they generally sympathize with him in his detestation of he hear ot AY on ... It is said thatf the sound of a bagpi pe would put the whole college of cadinals to flight , even if St . Peter himself were in the midst ot then 1 ,, 0 thoroughly is everything connected with North Britain detested on thobunto of tho Tiber . But perhaps Mr . Borrow is jea ous of the fecoteh ntio 0 tho Pope , and has a suspicion that it goes beyond his own . I « ve » » 6 us the genealogy of his dislike : Scott ' s novels diftW a toeto for Jatob 0 songs , the singing of which revived a partiality for the Jacobite .. then dw-., who . iftor thif nnoatnsv of James II ., went over in droves to the Vatic .
This wo take to bo a very p hilosophical reason for hating everybody w . name begins with Mac , or who has oven breakfasted on oatmeal , nv * . the Scotch , Mr . Borrow most detests the Germans . lie knows nil , nb > t tnu , literature , in which ho finds no poem worth mentioning except v 1 >« We fear that Mr . Borrow knows a great deal too much . Look wi u . n ; ho will , some fragments of his multifarious knowledge starts ui > bu 10 mind's eye , nnd leads him like a Will-o ' -the-wisp away from his QP . Welsh , Irish , Spanish , Chinese-all tongueB are familiar to him . 1 ¦ j ° ^ he became a polyglot by reading nil sorts of translations oi the JJ ) l 0 ^ :, any rate , many tongues ho has , which wo- sincerely regret , bii to v ^ would bo much ploosuntor if his vagaries wore restricted witlim ™ ° * r of our own dialect . Still , to road Mr . Borrow is to be often amu , ouo ( annoyed , and sometimes disgusted . He hns n groat deal ot ti ein , , pro . it deal more vanity . It is this latter quality that make hi , q « J with the critics and the newspapers . If he had the loasfc notio <> i ju « ^ ho would admit that thoy have just as much right to laug h at * " { as ho Una to enlarge upon theirs . We hold that newspapers , aio very o
Untitled Article
« Critics are not the legislators , but the judges ana police of literntiire They do not mSe laws-thoy interpret and try to enforce them . -Edinlttrr / h licv % etv . ^
. R*Yt 3ltt£Rfltttr£» 0
fCiterntttrt-
Untitled Article
e ¦ . ¦ 52 D _ . THE . 1 * E AjD g II . [ No . J 75 Sattjrpay ,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), May 30, 1857, page 520, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2195/page/16/
-