Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

which shows God in me fortifies me. That which shows God out of me, makes me a wart and a wen. There is no longer a necessary reason for my being."

Such is the system which is to supersede all religions whatsoever, and to prove as imperishable as the soul itself! To us, it appears a tissue of assumptions the most gratuitous, and of incongruities the most palpable that can well be imagined ;-the

dreams of a sick man-velut ægri somnia-rather than the deliberate findings of a well-balanced mind; and which, but for the colours with which the genius of its author has contrived to invest it, and the mixture of truth it contains, would at once, and every where, be denounced and scouted, not merely as an assault on the Christian religion, but as an outrage on the principles of sound reason and common sense. J. R.

COMBE'S REPLY TO KENNEDY'S "NATURE AND REVELATION

66

HARMONIOUS."

WE concur with Archbishop Whately in holding, that men are bound to use their own natural faculties in the search after all truth that is within the reach of those faculties; and that they ought to try, by their own proper evidence, questions which form no part of revelation properly so called, but which are accidentally alluded to in the sacred writings." In so far, therefore, as the work of Mr George Combe on the "Constitution of Man" inculcates the study of man's nature, corporeal, mental, and moral, and of the laws of the external world: in so far as it advocates the cultivation of science, and holds up to view the connexion between advancement in knowledge and the progress of civilisation in so far as it directs attention to the physical and organic laws, according to which the procedure of Divine Providence is conducted, and warns the ignorant and thoughtless of the calamities which attend the infringement of these laws; and, we may add, in so far as it breathes a humane and philanthropic spirit, and indicates a desire for the elevation of mankind in intelligence and physical comfort, we heartily sympathize with the views and aims of the writer of that treatise. Nor do we deny that there is much in the book which may be of great service in gaining these important ends. When we have said this, however, we have exhausted

:

the commendation which a regard to true science and divine revelation leaves us at liberty to bestow upon it. The grave charge, of aiming at the subversion of some of the fundamental doctrines of christianity, must be preferred against the philosophy of the Constitution of Man," by every one who has read the work, and knows what christian doctrine is. It is a fact which speaks volumes as to the design and tendency of the book, that it is a special favourite with free-thinkers; and that the adoption of its principles has drawn from the bosom of christian families, and of the christian church, not a few— especially young men of inquisitive and speculative minds-into the abortive gulf of avowed infidelity. Mr Kennedy's "Nature and Revelation Harmonious," which appeared under the auspices of the "Scottish Association for opposing Prevalent Errors," was an opportune defence of scripture truth from the insidious assault of the Constitution of Man," and was well adapted, in its mode of treating the subject, to the class among which Mr Combe's philosophy has met with readiest acceptance. Leaving untouched the question of the truth or falsehood of phrenology, Mr Kennedy contented himself with seizing upon the leading points in which the doctrines of the phrenological school are antagonist to scripture: and has

shown, with great clearness of argument, that they are not legitimately deducible from the data on which Mr Combe founds his system: that they are opposed to true science, and are overthrown by Mr Combe's own concessions. In a pamphlet now before us, of some twelve pages, we have a vindication, by Mr Combe, of the sentiments to which Mr Kennedy's work refers. If this pamphlet be remarkable for aught besides the absence of every thing that could raise it as a literary production to the level of mediocrity, it is the adroitness with which the writer contrives to evade the reasoning of his opponent, even on those points on which he does not avowedly decline debate with him. We marvel somewhat that he should have been so little chary of his literary fame, as to give to the world a vindication of his opinions of so superficial a character. If the brevity and inanity of the performance be intended to indicate his opinion of the smallness of his opponent, we suspect that most men will ascribe them to the weakness of the cause of which he is the champion.

Mr Combe would fain have it believed, that it is only "Calvinism," and “Calvinistic interpretations of scripture," to which his doctrines are opposed. Now, the truth is, that "Nature and Revelation harmonious," which, according to his own showing, is "the best of the books which have been written against the Constitution of Man," and is "altogether superior to any thing he has seen produced on that side of the question," is the production of a man who is not a Calvinist; and that Mr Combe's opinions, in every point in which that book takes exception to them, come into direct collision with vital christianity. It is not with a section of christians, but with the faith of the universal church, that he is at war. If he is right when he substitutes the laws of the material world for a divine agency, operating

according to these laws: when he teaches that the world is advancing to a state of perfection by the development, as time rolls on, of its own inherent energies-just as the acorn, to use his own similitude, is developed into the oak: when he denies the depravity of man and the efficacy of prayer: when he rejects. the doctrine of spiritual influence in the renovation of human nature; and when he holds that the world is to be regenerated by means of the study of the human head, and the observance of the natural laws-these being the instruments by which man may reach the perfection to which he is destined-then it follows that the Bible is a fable, and christianity a dream. It is right that Mr Combe and his disciples should know their real position as assailants of the christian faith, and consequently of the book in which that faith is taught. In the title-page of his pamphlet, he has called Mr Kennedy's work "an attack." It was, in strict propriety of language, a defence. Mr Combe was the assailant: and, although he belong to the battalion of sappers and miners, it was not the less necessary that the citadel of divine truth should be defended against his machinations.

He tells us that, in holding the views to which we take exception, he is only an interpreter of nature and science; and that all who reject them "assail expositions of scientific truth." Agreeably to this, he hints, or more than hints, that no man holding evangelical views ever studied or expounded the facts of science. This distinction, it would appear, has been reserved for the disciples of the phrenological school! In his ، Constitution," he says,-" Christianity stands before us at present as interpreted by men who knew extremely little of the science, either of external nature or of the human mind." "The facts unfolded by science were unknown to the divines who first denied the capability of mankind to attain

by the development of their natural powers, to a higher condition than they have hitherto exhibited; and hence their decision against the capabilities of human nature has been pronounced causâ non cognitâ (in ignorance of the subject), and must be open for reconsideration." In the same tone we find him, in his pamphlet, calling upon "the friends of evangelical views" to expound the laws of nature themselves, directly from the records of creation, and then to show that their interpretations of scripture are in harmony with them." It is somewhat amusing to observe this overweening self-complacency in a writer, when he is replying to an opponent who has mastered every department of physical science; whose studies have ranged through the higher branches of the mathematics, and extended to the most recondite truths in natural philosophy; who has pushed his electrical researches to the region of discovery; and who is equally at home in perusing the Principia of Newton, and in giving out for popular instruction his accumulated and various stores of knowledge. This, we happen to know, is true of Mr Kennedy, whose modesty will shrink from our public notice of his merits. Can as much be alleged of Mr Combe's attainments as a student of science? It can scarcely be necessary to say any thing in reply to his insinuations, that evangelical religion and the cultivation of science cannot be found in combination. Yet it would be wrong to allow it to pass without notice. We know how lightly Mr Combe estimates the Bridgewater Treatises, whose authors, he tells us, "because they disdained to acknowledge phrenology as the philosophy of mind, although perfectly aware that there was no other system that could be applied with any reasonable success to the investigation in hand, have never even attempted to assign to human nature any definite or intelligible constitution." But we ap

peal from Mr Combe to the scientific world, and ask whether it is prepared to indorse his disparaging view of the geological labours of Buckland, of the physiological doctrines of Roget-and of the elaborate and eloquent disquisitions of Kidd, Kirby, Prout, and Chalmers? Is Wayland unworthy of being classed among writers on ethical philosophy? Was Ballantyne an ignorant pretender to mental science? or was Abercrombie a sciolist with reference to man's material " organism," or his intellectual and moral powers? These were men who maintained the great verities of evangelical religion, and held that true science can never be at variance with the doctrines of the gospel. Even with Mr George Combe the friends of evangelical truth are at one, so long as he confines himself in his lucubrations to the facts of science. He and they part company only when he draws from these facts certain conclusions which are not logically deducible from them; and builds theories which are antagonist to scripture, upon data which men, by whom the theories are rejected, know as thoroughly, and believe as firmly as he. And may he not be as liable to err in his expositions of scientific truths as men of evangelical views have been (according to him) when interpreting the Bible? Are theorisers on natural phenomena gifted with infallibility? We can scarcely be giving new information even to Mr Combe when we say, that the well-attested truths of science are embraced as readily by religious as by sceptical minds; and that, while evangelism can claim as her disciples not a few who are eminent in the higher walks of philosophy, she embraces in her ranks a multitude of writers who are engaged, through the press, in expounding the phenomena of nature to the popular mind. The publications of Dr Thomas Dick, and many of the works issued by the London Tract Society, which have

been scattered in tens of thousands among the masses, may be taken as illustrations of this last statement. Mr Combe is clearly a theologian in his own way. His expositions of scientific facts touch quite as much upon theological as upon philosophical questions. It is because he obtrudes his opinions into the province of theology, and teaches what we think a false religion, that we deprecate the spread of his opinions. On no point in theology does he more manifestly seek to overturn the doctrine of revelation than with reference to man's fallen state. Here he has been opposed with weapons taken from his own armoury. Mr Kennedy has triumphantly shown, that while attempting to explode the scripture doctrine as a fable, Mr Combe actually concedes it. He admits that as human nature has hitherto existed it has been degraded by ignorance, immorality, and wretchedness; which is in effect to say, that it has hitherto been corrupt. And he accounts for this by saying, that the animal part of man takes the lead, and, acting powerfully without the aid of culture or previous exercise, overpowers the rational faculties, and, bringing them into unnatural subjection, occasions the existence of gross sin and great misery. What is this promptitude and activity of man's animal faculties but an inborn defect in his constitution-an inherent and original tendency to sin? Now, an innate tendency to abuse our faculties, how good soever the original quality or the use of each separate faculty may be, is to all intents and purposes corruption or depravity. How does Mr Combe, in his reply, dispose of this reasoning? He dismisses the entire subject with the following sentence:"We leave this to Mr Kennedy as a subject belonging to theology!" Having flung his javelin, he flies: and, though it be a fundamental point in theology at which he has aimed a mortal blow, he declines to encounter the advocate

of revealed truth, who steps forward in its defence, on the ground that the author of "The Constitution of Man" does not meddle with theology! If there be Parthian skill here, Parthian courage is surely wanting. On the ques tion of man's original mortality, precisely the same tactics are employed.

In other respects Mr Combe's pamphlet does not lack proofs of boldness. It shows, that if his organ of cautiousness be sometimes active, his organs of firmness and destructiveness are not deficient in energy. He tells us, for instance, that he has no interest in the question of the harmony between geology and scripture; which is in effect to say, that, being indifferent about the reconcilableness of the statements of scripture with the discoveries of modern geology, he cares not though the Bible be proved to be false. Quoting some expressions of Dr Chalmers, and of the official circular of the "Scottish Association for Opposing Errors," he exults in the fact, that men's minds are seen every where drifting from their former anchorage ground of religious opinion; and that the piety and principle of the mass of the population, are not such as to present a barrier on which we can confidently rely against the spread of infidelity and superstition in these days of confusion and change. We were about to say, that this is showing the cloven foot with a vengeance. But we content ourselves with remarking, that it is so far satisfactory to find this writer throwing off his disguise, and coming forward in his own proper person, as the Goliath of scientific infidelity, to defy the armies of the living God. It is easier to fight an enemy in the open field than when he lies in ambush and the real position of the author of the "Constitution of Man" is seen more correctly by means of these confessions, than by means of the respect which he has been wont to express for the claims of scripture.

While measures are being adopted to expose the low infidel literature of our country, which has hitherto been too much allowed to have its own way, there is a loud call upon "those on whose honoured heads we see at once the crown of science and the crown of Christianity," to come forward in defence of the bulwarks of revelation against the attacks of the philosophical infidelity of our times, and to meet "scientific cavil with scientific reply." Nor should the periodical press be backward to sup

ply an antidote to the pernicious principles which works of high pretension, ability, and popularity are disseminating throughout society. In this sacred enterprise we shall be ready to lend a helping hand. In a subsequent article, therefore, having disposed, in the foregoing remarks, of one or two matters of a preliminary and general nature, we shall examine some of the leading fallacies which pervade the philosophy of Combe.

SABBATH TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY IN INTOXICATING LIQUORS: A Letter from a Session to Members of the Church under their inspection exposed to the temptation of Sabbath Desecration.

WE, the session of the congregation to which you belong, are deeply impressed with the importance of the due observance of the Lord's Day; and, in common with christians of every name, have witnessed, with deep concern, the tendencies to its desecration which mark the times in which we live.

Under the influence of this concern, we suggested, some months ago, that the subject should be brought be fore the congregation in the pulpit ministrations; which was done, in discourses on the perpetual obligation of the law which has set apart one day in seven for rest and religion; and the forms in which the law is contravened, in the devotement of the day, or a part of it, to worldly business or pleasure.

After this exhibition of truth and duty, the session felt that it was further necessary to enquire whether, or to what extent, the sanctity of the Sabbath was violated by members of the congregation, in the transaction of ordinary business, and especially in the sale of intoxicating liquor. The result has filled us with sorrow and alarm. We find that not a few are in the habit of engaging, less or more, in this traffic on the Lord's Day (apart altogether from the plea of necessity and mercy); and we feel

that we should not be acting faithfully toward them, nor showing a due regard to the Sabbath of the Lord, and the honour of the Lord of the Sabbath, if we did not use the language of remonstrance and admonition.

We beg to submit, to those who have been in fault, or who are in danger of being ensnared, a few considerations, which seem to bear upon their duty in this matter; and then we would offer a word of answer to those objections with which these appeals may be met.

I. We would have you to consider how such procedure trenches on the divine law. We begin with this, because, when God has spoken, it becomes us to hear: we are bound to receive whatever he reveals: we are bound to do whatever he commands. He who "knows our frame" has graciously reserved to us one day in seven as a periodical relaxation from labour, and as an opportunity for religious meditation, and fellowship, and service. O why is the kindness of this arrangement so little appreciated? Why is such mercy in any case despised? But it is not only the gift of his grace, it is also the law of his government; and to disregard it, is not only despite of his mercy, but rebellion against his authority. Even if

« AnteriorContinuar »