Page images
PDF
EPUB

nothing as well as omnipotence itself? "Weakness may, indeed, mistake ' such absurd and inconceivable nothings' for possibilities, or for realities. Omniscience cannot do this; for it is the sublime quality of omniscience to see everything exactly as it is in itself. Weakness may advance contradictory propositions, and believe them to be true; but omniscience is utterly incapable of such imbecility. But even if omniscience could regard such contradictions as true; omnipotence could not embody them in an actual existence. In the language of Leibnitz, and of an infinity of grave authors',—' It is certain that the existence of God is not an effect of his own will. [He did not create himself. If he had not existed, he cpuld not have created himself; for non-entity or nothing could not create an infinite God. On the other hand, if he did exist, he could not create himself; for that cannot be brought into existence, which is already in existence. It is perfectly certain, then, that God did not create himself; and it is equally certain that he could not have created himself. He is, indeed, the uncreated, self-existent, eternal, and immutable God.] He exists not, because he wills to exist, but by the necessity of his infinite nature. He is not all-powerful, and he knows not all things, because he wills it so; but because these attributes are necessarily identical with himself. The empire of his will regards only the exercise of his power; he actually produces only that which he wills, and he leaves all the rest in pure possibility. Hence it is, that his empire extends only to the existence of his creatures, and not to their essences. God can create matter, a man, a circle, or leave them in nothingness; but he cannot produce them, without giving them their essential properties'. That is to say, he cannot make them what they are, and not what they are, at one and the same time. He cannot make a circle, without giving it a round figure; or a rational being, without endowing it with the attribute o£ rationality. Such are, in fact, precisely, and in his own words, the illustrations of Leibnitz, and of his 1 infinity of grave authors'. (See Essais de Thiodicee, Partie II., §183.)

In the passage, then, which our reviewer has selected for his most pathetic criticism, there is nothing but one of the merest commonplaces of theology. Yet he indignantly exclaims: 'How he talks about omnipotence, as if he understood all about it, and comprehended the whole range of its possibilities! How astonishing the assertion, that omnipotence is in every respect on a level with weakness, having " no advantage over it". If we were a weeping philosopher, we should undoubtedly shed tears here'. That is to say, if he were only a weeping philosopher, he would shed tears over the presumption and want of modesty in others, and not over his own. It is said that charity begins at home; it is certain that repentance should do so.

The above specimens of our reviewer's blunders must suffice. Many others might have been selected for examination; but as the object of this reply is to refute the charge of atheism, so it was necessary to notice only the blunders made in his attempts to establish that charge. If we did not believe, that the writer has a far greater power, if power it may be called,1 to perpetrate contradictions', than God himself has; then we should, indeed, consider ourselves guilty of the rankest atheism. In this respect, he has decidedly the advantage, if advantage it may be called, over omnipotence itself.

He reminds his author, in conclusion, that'it takes a very great man indeed,—one of the aloe blossoms of humanity,— as they have been beautifully called, to know well, and at all times, what he is doing in the etherial regions of thought'. Now this is very true. It takes a wise man,—a very wise man indeed,—to know at all times what he is about in those etherial regions. Not one in a million ever makes the discovery. The « author of A Theodicy, who is not a wise man, had to pore over 'an infinity of grave authors', and read, and reflect, and compare, and analyse, and combine, and reason, and meditate, . long—long before he began to dream of what he was doing in the regions of pure thought. He could admire, but he could not imitate, the free and imperial flights of more gifted minds in the lofty regions of speculation. He had, on the contrary, to grope his way along the solid earth, and make careful, cautious observations of the regions above. Our critic would, perhaps, have found himself under the necessity of pursuing a somewhat

similar course, if he had not been ‘one of the aloe blossoms of humanity ’. As it is, we can discover no signs of the conscien' tious care, the truth-loving caution, or the persevering patience, which should accompany and guide every sincere and devout enquirer after truth. He soars, by one grand iiight, far above an infinity of Christian authors; and, without ever having read one of them, he is perfectly sure that the truth which has been learned from them is ‘ atheistical ’. Hence, he does not hesitate to hang the author ofA T/zeodiey on ‘one of the horns of the atheistical dilemma `. It was to have been expected, indeed, that when the author in question came into conflict with his little, hasty, crude, and superficial notions, he would incur the charge of atheism. If, in Egypt, he had refused divine honors to an onion, or a cat, he would, in like manner, have been regarded as an atheist by the devout worshippers of those great deities. If, indeed, he were compelled to make a choice, he would decidedly rather worship an Egyptian cat, or onion, than the little, crooked, conceptions of such a critic.

ART. VIII.-(J0nstitu1ion.al Jbnzar('hy in F ramfe. By Ernest Resnan. Boston: Roberts Brothers. 1871.

It requires the greatest eflbrts of the greatest intellects to see, even partially or imperfectly, the ‘tendency of things’; or to catch even a glimpse of the controlling principles and causes that are silently, and almost imperceptihly, working out the ends of the All-Directing Mind. In considering the past, the most dispassionate judgment of the philosophic historian is required to detect and to trace the hidden causes ot’ events, and to explain their slow and subtle

operations from age to age. How much more difiicult, then, nay, how impossible, is it to discern such causes while they are at work around us, influenced, as we are, by the all-absorbing interests, and prejudices, and passions of the present. Whenewrer events occur of more than ordinary interest, we generally expect innumerable efforts, to interpret and explain their bearing;,but, if we are to judge of the importance of those that are before us to-day, by the number and variety of the attempts to gather from them the ‘ Signs of the Times ’, we .must indeed be passing through a momentous and stirring period. The results, and the experiences, of the Franco-Prussian struggle naturally furnish the theme of the majority of these efforts; but, with many, these results of the war are made the occasion of more general observations upon the present condition and influence of the several great powers; or, more par-ticularly, upon the elements of weakness and strength respectively exhibited by those two,-Prussia and France. There are many indications that we are living in an important era. \Vithout rehearsing such indications, we may remark-what is generally conceded-that, after making all due allowances for the changes necessarily brought about in warfare by the introduction and general use of railroads, the electric telegraph, and the improved weapons of destruction,-all tending to render wars now ‘ short, sharp, and decisive ’,-the recent campaigns of Von Moltke, in results, as well as in brilliancy, have no parallel in history, since the days of the first Na' poleon. Among the countless speculations recently advanced, we may cite, in the first place, the many and varied attempts to account for and explain the remarkable success of' the Prussian armies in the French and Austrian W'a.l‘S. For ourselves, while we accord t`ull credit to the wonderful genius'of the great Captain -of our day, the hero of a six weeks’ campaign, which culminated so gloriously at Sadowa, as well as to the strategist who planned and executed this still more brilliant campaign from the Rhine to the walls of Paris; and, while we also accredit to the great brain of Prussia’s great statesman what is so unquestionably its

'due, for the foresight and prudence, which secured every possi

ble advantage that foresight and prudence could provide against the day of battle, inevitable in both cases, as that far-seeing mind discerned; we are, after all, still disposed to believe, with many whose opinions should carry weight, that these advantages are insufficient to account for the wonderful results of either of those wars. Nor are we entirely satisfied with that cursory view usually taken of the Austrian campaign, which attributes the acknowledged superiority of the Prussian soldier over the Austrian on the field of battle to the advantages of his needle-gun; but are inclined to adopt the views of those, who would account for the splendid success of the Prussian army, in both of the late wars, upon the ground of the superiority of the Prussian of this day over the Austrian, as well as over the Frenchman.

While it seems generally conceded, that the fresh vigor and youth of the Prussian soldier makes him more than a match for his older, and it may be, degenerate neighbor and rival of Austria; yet, it is somewhat startling to hear the same said in connection with the Frenchman, who has heretofore enjoyed so high a reputation as a soldier. , Still facts,—stern facts,—are presented to us, and, if we refuse to accept the version above alluded to, we are called upon to give some other explanation, of them.

Again, it comes to us from the most distinguished source,, that the old European society is crumbling away, and that new centres of civilisation are being formed; and, further still, that the greatness even of old England herself is more apparent than real, and that the Northern hordes of Eussia will now be no longer checked by her brilliant diplomacy, or by the dread of her hitherto all-powerful combinations.

"We, of this country, are also called upon to note many strange things happening around us, which are magnified and colored by the particular influences under which they are viewed. And, finally, we are told that there is a general movement of the common mind upward; that workingmen are coming into power all over Europe, and indeed all over the world.

Far be it from us, recognizing, as we do, the talent and the

« PreviousContinue »