Page images
PDF
EPUB

tween theism and atheism, and is logically necessitated to elevate itself to the one or to descend to the other.1

When idealism is followed from Germany into France it becomes still more difficult to decide whether or not it is to be described as pantheism in any of the forms which it has there assumed. The Abbé Maret, one of the historians of pantheism, represents not only M. Cousin but all the chief members of the Eclectic school as pantheists. This is, however, a very exaggerated view. M. Cousin himself can merely be charged with holding tenets which involve pantheism, not with explicity teaching it; while the eclectics as a body have maintained the cause of theism with conspicuous zeal and talent. The views of M. Renan as to Deity are so vague and incoherent that one hesitates to attach to them any name. He prays with rapt devotion to the Father, the Father in heaven, and we fancy we are overhearing the supplications of a Christian theist; he vows, "I think there is not in the universe an intelligence superior to that of man," and we conclude that he is an atheist; he asks, "Who knows if the highest term of progress after millions of ages may not evoke the absolute consciousness of the universe, and in this consciousness the awakening of all that lived?" and we answer here is

1 See Appendix XXXIX.

[ocr errors]

pantheism: but what he really is, or even in the main is, it is almost impossible to ascertain. The theism, I fear, is a mere semblance, and "Our Father in heaven" on his lips merely equivalent to Our Father the abyss," to whom he assures us that "we feel ourselves to be in mysterious affinity." The true state of his mind, if we may venture to say so, appears to be one of perpetual oscillation between atheism and pantheism-between a God who is merely "the category of the ideal" and a God who is a blind but mighty fatality, labouring to bring forth by a slow and painful self-evolution an absolute intelligence—a man-God, in whose consciousness the thoughts and feelings of all the generations of humanity may be comprehended.

The ablest attempt which has been made in France in the present day to substitute for the ordinary idea of God one derived from the principles of idealism, is that of M. Vacherot in his 'Metaphysics and Science.' With all his speculative enthusiasm and talent, however, he has only reached the poor result that God must be regarded as the ideal of the reason, as abstract but not real being, as what exists only by thought and for thought. We can scarcely call this pantheism, because, instead of implying that God is the source, substance, and explanation of the universe, it supposes that He is the source,

substance, and explanation of nothing-existing merely as a notion.1

In our English speech pantheism has been sung by Shelley, preached by Emerson, and recommended in loose rhetorical fashion by various writers, but it has not yet been presented in the form of a carefully reasoned theory.2

1 See Appendix XL.

2 See Appendix XLI.

LECTURE X.

PANTHEISM.

I.

WHEN we observe how widespread pantheism is, and has always been, we are naturally led to ask, Why has it proved so attractive? The consideration of this question may be combined with that of another equally important: Does it deserve to be as attractive as it has actually proved to be? These are the two questions which I shall keep before me in the present lecture. While endeavouring so far to answer both, I shall consider them, as I have just indicated, not apart, but in connection. Thus viewed they are practically equivalent to the single question, What are the real and apparent merits and defects of pantheism ?

Let us, in the first place, seek an answer by judging of pantheism as a response to the purely and properly religious wants of human nature.

Now, obviously, pantheism is in this reference incomparably superior to atheism. In every form it gives some answer to our religious cravings. In every form atheism gives none. Pantheism always presents at least a little sustenance for the spirit, and sometimes a comparatively rich supply. Atheism yields nothing whatever which can satisfy the higher appetites of a human being. It pronounces everything a vanity except what is finite and fleeting. It is most natural, therefore, that the general mind and heart of humanity should never have hesitated when the alternative presented to it was pantheism or atheism to prefer the former.

Then pantheism has a decided advantage over polytheism in virtue of its emphatic affirmation of the unity and infinity of God. It responds, in consequence, to imperative demands of reason which polytheism contradicts. Hence while the human mind has always found itself compelled, as soon as it began to philosophise, either to assail polytheistic beliefs or to interpret them in a way which changes their entire character, it has, on the contrary, been always led by speculation to adopt pantheistic tenets. It is just when polytheism begins to pass into pantheism that philosophy makes its appearance; and, in fact, it is the philosophy which accounts for the transition. Further, pantheism has the power of rendering polytheism subservient to its advancement. It can provide it with

« PreviousContinue »