Page images
PDF
EPUB

the Godhead was received with general assent until Arius shocked the Church by the promulgation of his belief upon that point. Then Arian controversy acquired such importance, that, in A.D. 325, a Council was assembled at Nice to decide finally upon the matter in dispute. Had these doctors and divines devoutly studied the Word, they might have seen that their own dogma of a Trinity of Persons was as false as the heresy of Arius. They might have seen that revelation conveys to us that knowledge of God and His ways to men which cannot be discovered by human research, and that man is left free in the exercise of those powers of mind and intellect which render him a progressive being. But this they did not see, hence the line of thought naturally followed by the mind diverged more and more from that rigid line laid down for all those who desired to be regarded as devout sons of the Church.

(To be continued.)

I. T.

Review.

LIGHT ON LIFE. ESSAYS BY ROBERT R. RODGERS. JAMES SPEIRS.

London, 1875.

THE impression which the perusal of this volume leaves upon us is that it is a collection of sermons in the shape of essays; the texts from Scripture having been removed, and extracts from Christian and Pagan poets substituted in their place. Yet, whether regarded as a collection of essays or sermons, the volume before us is written in a sprightly style, and it abounds in graphic delineations, apparent paradoxes, and unexpected antitheses; all of which commend it to that class of readers who desire not only to be instructed but also to be interested and amused. Whether this style is best suited to the subjects treated of in the book, and whether it is a useful style for sermons, is a different question. Divine and spiritual things ought to be approached with a certain feeling of reverence and humility, and anything savouring of trivialities is out of place there. From this charge the book before us is not altogether free. Besides, the sprightly particulars contained in it sometimes remove out of sight the general subject under discussion, so that the mode in which this is treated occasionally resembles more the stringing together of shining beads than the strong and powerful concatenation of logical argument.

It is difficult to say whether the book is intended for the general reader, or for those acquainted with the Writings of the New Church, for, on p. 43, in introducing some quotations from these Writings, the author does not mention Swedenborg by name, but speaks of him as "a writer of the last century;" while again, on many pages, we find unexplained references to D. P., H. H., Ap. Ex., T. C. R., Spir. Dia., which must be perfectly unintelligible to the general reader, and could have been intended only for those who are acquainted with Swedenborg's Writings. As the author, however, in many places appeals to the authority of these Writings, it is but just that we should examine some of his "Essays" in the light of these Writings.

In the first "Essay," which is entitled "The Lord our Light and Salva

tion," the author lays great stress upon the truth that "He is the source of that light by which man acts, and of the good which he obtains” (p. 7), and that "the good which is imparted by the Lord is wrought within man, while he does not reflect upon it" (p. 8); and from this he infers that "as man's goodness is not man's, but the Lord's in him, if ever he becomes conscious of his goodness, he merely recognizes himself, and it is instantly turned into self-merit" (pp. 8, 9). This position he reasserts on the same page in these words, “True goodness is the soul's newest and freshest life, and if ever it enters the natural consciousness, it fades and becomes a part of man's general self-hood;" and again he says, "True good has no consciousness of anything but its own joy;" and, finally, on p. 10, “When a man is really good he is no more conscious of the fact than he is conscious that his blood circulates, or that the atmosphere has weight and presses upon him with a force equal to fifteen pounds to the square inch. He is in good, good is his being, and no man is conscious that he is himself (!). When he sees good it is because it is outside him, because he contemplates it from a consciousness that is not good, and because it is not himself."

The meaning of this in plain English is good is good only so long as it is confined to the will, and as soon as it enters into the understanding and becomes conscious of itself, it becomes evil. Surely this cannot be the meaning of Swedenborg's doctrine. He cannot mean that we should never exercise the process of introspection and self-examination; and he never teaches that good is turned into evil when it enters into man's consciousness. It is true that the Lord alone is absolutely good; and that all goodness upon entering into man is more or less tarnished by that which is his own, or by his proprium; but this is true not only of the good of which he becomes conscious, but also of that which he receives unconsciously. From the very moment when good enters into a man's soul it loses its Divine quality, and puts on a human quality, whether a man become conscious of it or not. And, besides, only in proportion as man does good as of himself, is he capable of receiving good from the Lord; he must, therefore, not only become conscious of good in his understanding, but he must also consciously think and do good, or else the Lord cannot flow into him with His good. The Lord does not act through man; but man takes consciously of the Lord's life, and he confirms this life in himself by acting in accordance with the laws of Divine order. Truth is the means by which the Lord leads man to good; and unless man becomes conscious in his understanding of the truth, which is the form of good, the Lord cannot lead him to good. Unconscious good, the good of the babe in the womb, is not genuine good; good in order to be real good must become conjoined with truth, i.e., man must become conscious of it in his understanding; this is a law of Divine Order, it is the law of the establishment of the Church, of the Lord's kingdom in him.

A similar misapprehension of a general doctrine of the Church we find in the second "Essay," entitled "Night and Morning." This essay, like the former, abounds with sparkling thoughts and graphic descriptions, yet the general argument is at fault. With the author "morning" is always synonymous with good, and "night" with evil; when yet there is a difference in the night and in the morning. There is that night where everything is dark, and which is like the night prevailing in hell, and which night is synonymous with evil; and, again, there is another night when the moon and the stars shine, which night has a different spiritual signification altogether. This distinction is ignored by the author. So also the "sun" and the "morning," which are identified by the author with good, are not always the emblems of good, for the sun which parches the ground and dries up the seed signifies self-love, and thus the fire of evil.

Throughout the whole of his treatise the author seems actually to acknow

ledge only one kind of good, viz., celestial good; and he does not seem to acknowledge the reality of spiritual good, the lowest form of which is the good of faith, and which good is represented by the state of the earth at night, when the moon and the stars shine. Relatively, or compared with celestial good, spiritual good is in darkness or in shade; yet this darkness is not infernal darkness, and it is not represented by the night prevailing in hell, but by the night when the moon and stars shine. The various degrees of this spiritual good also are represented by the six days of creation, while celestial good is represented by the seventh day.

There are some other points to which we must take exception. The Essay on "Reform" might lead a young and inexperienced reader to think that there is no spiritual use in desisting from outward evil until, or further than, the inward inclination to commit it is removed. The author says, "The Lord does not permit evils to be destroyed externally, except so far as the love of them is or can be removed from the heart." "The Lord seeks not to prevent but to cure; to remove the cause of evil, and not to heal the wounds of society before there is health and soundness within." Had the author said, "The Lord seeks not only to prevent but to cure," he would have expressed the real truth. This theory is also advocated in the Essay on "Swine and their Symbolism," where the author says, "No amount of instruction, of reading, and mere study can free us from some of our evils; we have to be let into them-to love them, to indulge in and live them, before we can even believe in their existence, or that we are capable of them." It is true that the great aim of all Divine laws and providential arrangements is to root out evil from the heart, because without this there is no true reformation of character. But it is a wrong, and therefore a dangerous doctrine to teach, that it is unnecessary to desist from outward evil until the love of evil is removed from the heart. Young men, for example, need no encouragement to sow their wild oats, under the impression that if the inclination is there, it may as well come out and manifest itself, and that to restrain it without the right motive would be hypocrisy. It is true that evil is permitted. It is permitted to every one to will and think evil, for this is a necessary condition of human freedom; but all laws, Divine and human, go to prevent the commission of outward evil. Evil in act cannot indeed be altogether prevented, and so far is permitted, but it certainly ought not to be encouraged. We do not say that the author does this by intention, but we think his theory has this tendency, and, if acted upon, will have this effect. His quotations from Scripture and from Writings of the Church, in support of his views, we have not noticed, as they have really no bearing on the point.

Nearly related to this subject is that treated in the Essay "From Servitude to Freedom." It is true, as here stated, that man is the subject of hereditary evil; and that "no man is responsible for inheriting that on which his wishes were not consulted." But is "this condition the price of our creation, the burden of our life, the yoke of slavery under which we are born?" It is true that "every one is born with a predisposition to love and delight in evil;" but this does not make him a slave to sin till, with a knowledge of sin, he chooses to love and do it. The young are not slaves to evil, because they do not know from reason what evil is, and that evil is the parent of sin. But the author goes further than this. He asserts that "so far as the conviction that truth is better than falsity, and good better than evil extends, to that extent man is responsible to God for the life he leads; or, what is the same thing, he is responsible to his convictions." Is it so? Many, if not all, of the greatest scoundrels and criminals on earth have no convictions that truth is better than falsity, and good better than evil. If they were only responsible to their convictions, their responsibility would be very limited indeed. Men are responsible according

to their knowledge. To this extent are they responsible. Yet, what is responsibility? Responsibility is the capacity and means of judging. We are not to think of responsibility to God in the old way, as the result of some outward arbitrary law. Nor are we to think of happiness as determined in the same way. Our happiness is determined and measured by our capacity for it. God desires to make all happy; but those only who have a capacity for happiness can receive and enjoy it; and their capacity is the measure of their enjoyment. Man's capacity is formed in this life; it is filled in the other. Evil is that which destroys this capacity, and whatever destroys it is evil. And so completely may it be destroyed, that the mind may call good evil and evil good, and put darkness for light and light for darkness.

These strictures on his book we are sure Mr. Rodgers himself will regard as no hostile criticism. Mr. Rodgers is a man of talent and a power among us. Had he been less, his book might have been left to find its level. It is because we wish him to be a power for good only, that we point out what we regard as blemishes in his work. As a proof and illustration of Mr. Rodgers' power we give the following extract from the Essay on "Dew-the Truth of Peace:"

"In a general sense dew is an image of the truth that makes the heart and life fruitful in goodness; or the truth of peace. Dew refreshes vegetation and stimulates it to fruitfulness; and spiritually it symbolizes the truth that makes the heart and life fruitful in goodness. With this meaning of dew in our memories, every fact in relation to the formation and use of dew will be spiritually instructive and

highly poetic.

First, notice the origin of dew. Dew is formed by the surfaces of bodies which are colder than the neighbouring air coming in contact with the vapour which the air holds in suspension. From this fact it follows, that dew is formed either wholly or chiefly at night, and it is found to be formed more copiously between midnight and sunrise than between sunset and midnight.

"These facts may seem of little importance to us as spiritual beings; but when we remember that the Infinite God said, 'I will be as the dew unto Israel,' they are at once invested with deep and great significance. Night is not only a physical fact; it is a spiritual fact also, and night comes to the human soul. We are often without clear mental light; the understanding is overshadowed. We have striven manfully and cheerfully, and worked with good heart in the sunshine and warmth of prosperity and successful enterprise; for a season friendships have been pure and sweet; life has been without crosses; desires have been abundantly gratified, we have gained our ends, and had our own way, and our hearts have rejoiced in the day of our exaltation. But this day of longer or shorter duration has at last come to an end, and night has succeeded. Everything, somehow, has seemed to be under a shadow; we appear to be at cross purposes with our very selves; every thorn seems to have for us an extra scratch; if a conterfeit coin is in currency, we are sure to get it in our change; if flour goes down in price, we are sure to have ordered a sack just before the fall occurred; in fact, one might conclude at times, that everything was leagued in a conspiracy against us, and took a special pleasure in our mortification. This is our night. But it is never to be forgotten, that it is during this night, the night of the soul, when, if ever, the Divine Truth comes to us as the dew. The dew is one of the blessings of the night it is one of night's best features, and reconciles us somewhat to its coming; it is one of nature's loveliest works, and without the night we should never be blessed by it or see it more."

One remark on this passage. Not the troubled, but the tranquil night, is that after which the dew is found.

Mr. Rodgers' book is very tastefully got up. The rising sun on the cover of the book, which is very artistically executed, may be regarded as emblematic of its contents. But we have no doubt that the sun which even now sparkles in the dew of his early thoughts, albeit these are the outcome of his "night thoughts," will, when it attains to a greater altitude, give a more certain as well as a more powerful light, and will warm as well as enlighten, and invigorate as well as cheer, all who come under its influence.

545

Miscellaneous.

The

CHRISTIAN UNION.-A great effort is made by Dr. Döllinger and other leaders of the Old Catholic movement to promote union among the different branches of the divided Episcopal Church. We say the Episcopal Church, for it does not seem to have entered the minds of those who have recently held a six days' Conference at Bonn to promote this unity of the brethren, that any other branches of the Christian Church were interested in the matter, or needed to be consulted on the subject. The parties who have assembled at this Conference are the Old Catholics, the Greek Church, and certain leading members of the Church of England. About one hundred members attended the Conference. Dr. Döllinger, from the chair, seems to have given quite a number of long addresses on a variety of topics connected with the history of the Church, and of the development of its dogmatic statements. great aim was to procure a general statement on the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Ghost, which divides the Eastern and Western Churches. Propositions were submitted by Canon Liddon and the Dean of Chester on the part of Anglicans. Those presented by the Greek Church conceded nothing, and offering, therefore, no base of union, were speedily withdrawn. In the end, a series of propositions by the chairman were accepted. These propositions stated agreement in accepting the doctrinal decisions of the ancient undivided Church; in denying that the addition of the Filioque took place in an ecclesiastically regular manner; in acknowledging on all sides the representation of the doctrine of the Holy Ghost as it is set forth by the Fathers of the undivided Church; and in rejecting every proposition and every method of expression in which in any way the acknowledgment of two principles in the Trinity may be contained.

The aim of these theologians is commendable, and they seem to have felt satisfied with their work. They must be very sanguine indeed, however, to hope for the unity of the Church on the base they are thus adopting. It is obvious that the greater part of those

assembled express no authority but their own. The Church of England has taken no corporate part in these discussions ; and what an eminent Churchman has designated "The Church in England," i.e., the dissenting communities, has taken no part whatever in the movement. The moving and the guiding spirit in the work is the President, Dr. Döllinger, who has brought to the task immense erudition, and exercised unfailing tact and patience in the effort to accomplish his purpose. A divided Godhead will ever be accompanied by a divided Church; and not in the effort to restore the Old, but in the cordial acceptance of the New, will be found the solid ground of real unity.

:

PURGATORY.-Dr. Döllinger's diver gence from the Papacy is not only in ecclesiastical but also in doctrinal mat ters. The following is his statement at the recent Conference respecting the Papal doctrine of Purgatory:"It must first be noticed that it was only amongst the Germans and Dutch that the common expression (Fegefeuer-cleansing fire) introduced the idea of a material fire. It was not necessarily contained in the word Purgatorium. The ancient Church knew nothing of a purgatory, and the first to introduce and fix the opinion in the West was Gregory the Great, in the year 600. The belief of the ancient Church was, that after death those who were not ripe for the heavenly kingdom were kept in an intermediate state (Hades), where they were gradually purified and prepared for the fulness of blessing, and that prayers for them in that state were of benefit. All this was only a widely-spread opinion, and was not contained in any settled articles of faith. The new doctrine that spread in the West was of a fixed place, where souls were purged by material fire, and where prayers offered for them shortened this fiery ordeal. In the thirteenth century the Schoolmen manufactured this material conception into an article of faith; and in the beginning of the fourteenth century the doctrine of Papal indulgences, as a means of deliverance from Purgatory, was spread. The abuse

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »