fit only to inspire aversion or to create disgust. It is in such terms that we reply to those of our critics, on the one hand, who attack us for adopting what they call a narrow and gloomy theology; and to those, on the other hand, who regard as dangerous the method of discussion we have pursued. We have tried honestly to view things with two eyes,—the eye of knowledge and the eye of faith: first with one, then with the other, finally with both. To what extent we have succeeded is, after all, a matter of minor importance if only the lawfulness of this mode of vision be ultimately allowed. And just as we have a better appretiation of the form and distance of natural objects when we view them with both our physical eyes, so, we venture to think, must it prove with the truths of which we now speak. We have explained that the first part of our argument is altogether independent of revelation; proceeding as it does solely upon scientific data, and the conclusions which these seem to render inevitable. In the second part, however, we feel that we ought not to deprive ourselves of the overwhelming additional evidence which we derive from Christian records. Here, there fore, we shall neither gratify one class of our critics by starting from a point which ignores what we regard as the fully warranted belief of the great majority of Christians, nor shall we be overruled by the excessive timidity of another class who apparently regard a two-eyed man as a monster in those regions where truths of really vital importance are concerned. The horrors and blasphemies of Materialism are at least every first day of the week so fully treated by many theologians that it is almost unnecessary for us to say anything on their view of the subject, especially as we could not compete with the great majority of them in strength and happy audacity of language. We would therefore content ourselves with mildly inquirin what sort of regard for the image of the Divine in humanity is shown by those whDivine creed levels us all with the beasts that perish.' Even the antient Pagans were less disposed to such monstrosities : finxit in effigiem moderantum cuncta Deorum. sic, modo quae fuerat rudis et sine imagine, tellus It is well for the human race that such sophistical doctrines as those of Materialism ་ are as yet received by a small minority only. 'If in this life alone we have hope,' we should be led by common sense and prudence to make the best of it, our neighbour's sufferings notwithstanding. At least we should listen to him only as did the judge 'who neither feared God, nor regarded man,' when he said, 'This widow troubleth me; I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.' We would conclude by observing that the natural disinclination to receive as true a religion whose very first effect is 'to convict the world of sin,' is admirably set forth in the striking words of Peter1: 'Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.' See also Job xxi. 14, 15. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY SKETCH. 'L'immortalité de l'âme est une chose qui nous importe si fort, et qui nous touche si profondément, qu'il faut avoir perdu tout sentiment pour être dans l'indifférence de savoir ce qui en est.'-PASCAL. 'For he should persevere until he has attained one of two things; either he should discover or learn the truth about them, or, if this is impossible, I would have him take the best and most irrefragable of human notions, and let this be the raft upon which he sails through life-not without risk, as I admit, if he cannot find some word of God which will more surely and safely carry him.'-PLATO's Phado; translated by Jowett. I. THE great majority of mankind have always believed in some fashion in a life after dath; many in the essential immortality of the seal; but it is certain that we find many disbelievers in such doctrines who yet retain the nobler attributes of humanity. It may, however, be questioned whether it be possible even to imagine the great bulk of our race to have lost their belief in a future state of existence, and yet to have retained the virtues of civilised and wellordered communities. We have said that the disbelievers in such doctrines form a minority of the race; but at the same time it must be acknowledged that the strength of this minority has of late years greatly increased, so much so that at the present moment it numbers in its ranks not a few of the most intelligent, the most earnest, and the most virtuous of men. It is, however, possible that, could we examine these, we should find them to be unwilling disbelievers, compelled by the working of their intellects to abandon the desire of their hearts, only after many struggles, and with much bitterness of spirit. Others, again, without absolutely abandoning all hope of a future existence, are yet full of doubt regarding it, and have settled down into the belief that we cannot come to any reasonable conclusion upon the subject. Now, these men can have had nothing to gain, but rather much to lose, in arriving at this result. It has been reached by them with reluctance, with misgivings, not without a certain kind of persecution, nor without the loss of friends and the stirring up of strife; still they have fearlessly looked things in the face, and have followed whithersoever they imagined they were led by facts, even to the brink of an abyss. It is the object of the present volume to examine the intellectual process which has brought about such results, and we hope to be able to show not only that the conclusion at which these men have arrived is not justified by what we know of the physical universe, but that on the other hand there are many lines of thought which point very strongly towards an opposite conclusion. 2. A division as old as Aristotle separates1 speculators into two great classes, those who study the How of the Universe, and those who study the Why. 1 See Westminster Sermons, by the Rev. Charles Kingsley. |