Natural theology. An inquiry into the fundamental principles of religious, moral, and political science

Preface

The true theory of religion, morals, and politics constitutes the grand question of the day. We have arrived at a period of human progress, in which mere authoritative or traditional belief is held comparatively as of little value. Education is so widely spread that the majority of men think more or less for themselves, and demand evidence for that which they are called on to believe. As in all cases of a great movement of the human mind, they consequently are led to appeal to first principles, and of course the most plausible, though it may be the most superficial theories, are in the first instance generally adopted.

This, accordingly, is the case with respect to the sciences of religion, morals, and politics. The vast mass of mankind, while occasionally speculating with regard to them, have yet a sort of

VI PREFACE.

unconscious impression that we neither know, nor can know, anything definite about them whatever. Even the most intelligent thinkers are content with theories which either rest on assumptions of innate ideas, or which only imperfectly explain the phenomena.

Under those circumstances, Eevelation has been left without any firm foundation on which to rest. So much is this the case, indeed, that many excellent persons assume its authority to depend exclusively on some sort of mysterious belief communicated directly by superhuman influence. Others take it for granted that the miracles recorded in Eevelation must be true, and sufficient to sanction its authority, apart from natural religion ; though it is perfectly evident that this cannot be the case, as the very value of the testimony for those miracles must depend upon the moral character of the witnesses, and the object on account of which the miracles themselves were performed. No amount of testimony could he jprohative of miracles that were intended to sanction a scheme inconsistent with natural religion. Nay, the very words expressive of spiritual states used in a revelation must be interpreted by natural religion. The words " goodness," " justice," " mercy," and " truth," as well as the words " right," " wrong," " ought," " duty," and many

PREFACE. Vll

others, must be interpreted by natural religion, or we could attach no definite meaning to them at aU.

Not only, therefore, would the evidences of Eevelation be uncertain, or rather baseless, apart from natural religion, but there could be no such sciences as those of morality and politics. It is unnecessary to dwell upon this, because that it is so will be fully proved afterwards.

From these remarks it will be manifest that I publish this work under the conviction that the principles of natural religion have never been thoroughly vindicated. Hitherto, indeed, this has not been felt to be absolutely necessary. Until a very recent period the evidence of authority, combined with the half-conscious assurance involved in our feelings, seems in so far to have served the purpose. If anything be clear, however, it is clear that this state of things cannot last in the present age. Not merely infidelity, but gross materialism and pantheism are widely spread, and are rapidly spreading farther. Moral and political duties are beginning to be regarded, consequently, as without any obligation, and merely invented by influential parties to serve their own self-interested ends. Nor are these views merely put forward as speculative theories. They are unconsciously adopted by persons who know nothing about philosophical

Vlll PREFACE.

theories, and are practically affecting the character and conduct of immense masses of the people.

It was under these impressions, which have been specially forced on me by circumstances, that I entered on the consideration of this subject, and it is under the same impressions that I now offer the result of my investigations to the public. It has been my object to reason out every step of the argument demonstratively, and with the utmost plainness. With the exception of one chapter, therefore (Preliminary Inquiries, chap, i.), I have avoided all approach to metaphysical speculation ; and even that chapter is not essential, having been introduced for the sake of those who may desire to examine more profoundly the primary principles on which my argument rests. I have endeavoured to state every particular, moreover, in such a way as may be universally intelligible. In this view I have carefully separated the argument for the moral attributes of God from those which prove His omnipotence and omniscience, these latter being necessarily proved in the evidence for the existence of an intelligent First Cause. A mixing up of the proofs for these two classes of attributes has greatly tended to confuse the argument and weaken the power of the evidence for both.

I consider myself bound to add, that I believe

PREFACE. IX

the main argument to be perfect demonstration. Objections may no doubt be taken to the illustrations, or to the incidental and practical inferences, but the argument for the being and attributes of God, and the moral and political principles flowing therefrom, seems to be as certain as any proposition of geometry, assuming that the laws of nature are to be trusted. If these are not to be trusted, of course there could be neither physical nor spiritual philosophy, nor truth of any kind. We have too many crude and half-true theories already on religion, morals, and politics. Had I not believed the argument, therefore, from beginning to end, both plain and logically irresistible, I should not have presumed to intrude it on public notice. I have published it under the conviction that it will conduce to the interests of truth, specially with reference to the most important subject that can engage the attention of rational beings, by resting the faith of the religious world on foundations which cannot be shaken.

Contents

PAGE

PRELIMINARY INQUIRIES.

Chapter I. Sources And Limits Of Human Knowledge

No such thing as innate or intuitive ideas— Knowledge is primarily derived from feelings— Process— How knowledge may be derived from others— How knowledge may be derived from a comparison of effects produced by causes external to ourselves with effects produced by the operation of our own faculties— How knowledge is further implied in the desire of co-relatives capable of gratifying such desire— Universality of the conclusions of reason, 21

Chapter II. Natuee And Divisions Of Spiritual Science

Nature of spirit— Theory of materialism— Mode of studying spiritual science and its parts— Process under which we discover the existence of spirits external to ourselves— Process under which we discover the relations in which these spirits stand to ourselves— Division of the spiritual sciences, . . 41 xii CONTENTS.

Introduction

Universality of belief in higher spiritual existences— Outlines of the causes of this— Origin of polytheism— Relation of morality and politics to the belief in higher spuitual existences— Universal expectation of a revelation — How this is to be accounted for, 53

CHAPTER I.

ARGUMENT FEOM OUR SENSE OF WEAKNESS AND DEPENDENCE ; OR, A PRIORI ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE AND ATTRI- BUTES OF A GOD.

Explanation of the nature of the argument a priori, as contradistmguished from the argument a posteriori— Dovihi^ connected with a priori arguments as hitherto adduced — Proof that there must be an a priori argument of some kind, sufficient to convince every one of the existence of a Supreme Power, omnipotent, omniscient, true, just, benevolent, and eternal — Relation of this a priori with the a posteriori proof — Its character and limits indicated, ..... 69

CHAPTER 11.

ARGUMENT FROM THE ARRANGEMENTS AND ORGANISATION OF THE UNIVERSE ; OR, A POSTERIORI ARGUMENT FOR THE BEING AND NATURAL ATTRIBUTES OF A GOD.

Our proof for the exercise of intelligent agency in contrivmg and constructing the universe, is precisely the same as our proof for the intelligent agency of our fellow-creatures in contriving and constriicting artificial arrangements — It consists in our assurance from the knowledge which we have of the nature of our own reason, that intelligence alone, or some equivalent attribute, is competent to contrive and construct adjusted arrangements — The possible eternity of the phenomena of nature does not aft'ect the question at issue — A possible power of development in the products of nature does not afi"ect the question at issue — This still further realised in the necessity of supposing that the elements of

CONTENTS. xui

things must have been endowed with the precise properties competent to work out the phenomena — According to the development theory, these properties must have been infinitely numerous, if not contradictory, in each molecule — These considerations obviate every form of difficulty which can possibly arise from the assumption of that theory, or of any other theory — Extent and application of the proof to the power, wisdom, and immutability of God — Summary of the argument, 79

Chapter III. Argument For The Moral Attributes Op God

Definition and character of morality — God cannot be an immoral being — Proved from the position and relations of man to his fellow-creatures and his God — Objection arising from the rigour of God's justice obviated — No difficulty exists on the subject, except in so far as arises from the limited nature of the human faculties — Conclusion, . . . 109

Chapter IV. Relation Betwixt God And Man

God has created us for the purpose of seeking intense and permanent happiness, through victory in the struggle betwixt selfishness and love — This consideration necessarily opens to us the prospect of an immortality — The voice of nature heard in those laws which assure us of an immortality — This immortality will be intensely and permanently happy to those who seek it in the way which nature indicates — Such happiness involved in trust in God— This trust imperfect or wanting in all men under ordinary circumstances — Mode in which nature indicates that it is to be sought, .... 141

PAKT II.

ETHICS, OR THE SCIENCE OF MORALS.

INTRODUCTION.

The theory of the relation betwixt God and man applied to human circumstances— Subject little understood— Definition of ethics— The various moral theories that have been proposed, and why unsatisfactory, 155 xiv CONTENTS.

Chapter I. Spiritual Laws Of Nature

Difference in character betwixt the physical and moral laws of nature— Different kinds of happiness— We have in this a distinct indication of the mode in which our conduct should be regulated— In the struggle betwixt love and selfishness, selfishness conquers in the first instance- Process described —Power of habit and association— Only mode in wliich love can be generated— It must be stimulated and strengthened by the same means as selfishness is stimulated and strengthened—The object caimot be attained apart from religion— This proves the truth of religion, even if it had no other proof,

CHAPTEE II.

NATURE AND OBLIGATIONS OF MORALITY,

There is in all human beings a certain feeling of love for others —This the source of a high measure of happiness from the beginning, which grows greater and greater— Morality essential to the existence of our race— This proved from our relations to one another, our sense of approbation and disapprobation, and our prospect of a future life— How a sense of religion operates on the human mind— The obligations of and motives to morality definitely stated, as discoverable from the preceding considerations— Mode imder which we discover right and wrong in each case— Mode in which we can realise right— Conclusion, . 208

Chapter III. Details Of Morality

Recapitulation— Details of morality— Morality consists not in acts, but in intention and a state of mind— Illustrated— Categories under which the details of morality are comprehended—Love of ourselves— Love of our fellow-creatures— Love of our God— There can be no sufficient motive or obligation to morality apart from religion— Nature of moral law according to this theory, and mode of its realisation — Effect of this realisation on character. . . . . . . 234

CONTENTS. XV

Part III. Science Of Politics

INTRODUCTION.

Definition of political science— Its origin— Its relation to moral science — It concerns conduct rather than states of mind — Necessity of governors for administering political law— No direct natural law entitling one man to rule over another, except the law of the stronger— No political rights, therefore, under direct natural law— Misconceptions on the subject,

Chapter I. Nature And Foundation Of Political Rights

Immediate sources of political power — In so far the words " right," "ought," and "duty" can have no place in political science — Theory of compact, as the foundation of political rights, untenable— Theory of a tacit admission of such compact untenable- Submission to a government does not necessarily imply a recognition of its authority — Utility of government does not necessarily imply a recognition of the rights of those that administer it in any particular case— Paley correct in resting political rights on "the wiE of God," but wrong in assuming "the will of God " to be collected from " expediency "— " The will of God " declared in the actually existing constitution of things— This theory explained and vindicated, 283

Chapter II. Limits Of Political Rights

Limits of political rights— They are limited by the moral rights of others, as of superior authority— Classification of moral rights as relating to governed and governors : 1. Right of personal liberty— 2. Rights of labour and property— 3. Right of political power, 309

XVI CONTENTS.

Chapter III

SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED IN THE PRECED- ING CHAPTERS, AND DEVELOPMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AS FLOWING THEREFROM.

Summary of the principles established in the preceding chapters— Governments arise from circumstances, so as to be more or less suitable to the progress of society — Tlais is a declaration of the will of God— Evils arising from a sudden change on the essential character of any government— Common result of such changes, and the causes thereof— Further changes following on such result— Probable mode of restoring a government under such circumstances to working order— Illustrated in the case of Cromwell, and in the present proceedings of the French Empire— Liberty of the press —Class of persons in whom political power may be safely vested— Dangerous classes— Point of \aew in which political power ought to be regarded— Cause of misconceptions on this subject, S20

Appendix

A. Positive philosophy, 339

B. Theories of development, 349

C. Examples of extreme theories of political right, and argu-

ment involved in them, 351

NATURAL THEOLOGY.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION.

No one who has anything like a just appreciation of the nature of religion, can regret the objections which have been taken to it during recent years. Those who mourn over the propagation of infidel and rationalistic theories, cannot sufficiently know that religion must he everything, or it is worth nothing. Our belief, so far as it goes, must be clear, precise, and full, or it is a mere delusion. We do not indeed deny that at certain stages of human history, the evidence of authority and tradition may be suflicient to a greater or less extent. Siich evidence, combined with more strictly logical proof, may not only at such times satisfy the human mind, but may in reality constitute a much more trustworthy ground of belief than many people in their pride of supposed intellectual superiority are apt to imagine.

As, however, the energy of human thought develops in the progress of scientific discovery, it is impossible that difficulties should fail to suggest themselves with regard to a subject implying such profound and complicated considerations. It was clearly intended that it should be so. The evidences and truths of religion are so interwoven with other sciences, that they can only be appreciated in their fulness, as the philosophy of these sciences becomes more and more accurately known. Wherever a sudden impulse is given to general knowledge, difficulties will naturally arise with respect to Adews of religious science transmitted from former generations. Yet these will gradually become fewer and fewer. Sceptics, indeed, seem already to have reached their last possible objection to Christianity on principle, and as the last, so also the most important, for ever}i;hing else, as we shall presently see, is dependent upon it. It is the conclusive battle-field, on which, if religion be victorious, there may be skirmishes on isolated and unimportant points ; but as to principles, the contest will be at an end, for no enemy can ever find another position of the same character which can be occupied against her.*

* It is manifest that there can substantively be only two theories as to the constitution of the universe. It must either exist as it now is, by the very essential nature of material existence, or

The fact is, tliat the progress of science has done more to remove difficulties with respect to religion on the one hand, than to suggest them on the other ; and hence it is that sceptics have been driven back, till, as has been said, they have reached the only position which on principle it seems possible for them to occupy. That position is substantively Atheism. It is the doctrine that, in so far as we, at all events, have an opportunity of knowing, there is no personal Deity ; that nature is God, and God is nature. It might be supposed that multitudes would have eagerly pressed forward to oppose theories involving such a doctrine, which takes away from men all security for peace on earth, and all hopes of happiness in a world to come. But this was not the result. On the contrary, religious men turned away with disgust from even thinking on a philosophy from

it must be the work of an intelligent Agent. No third supposition appears possible. The one is the assumption of the Atheist, the other of the Theist. The question is therefore reduced to a very narrow compass. If the one be true, the other must be false. It will be our object to show that the one is not only probably true, but is demonstrably certain. If we succeed, all dispute as to the principle is at an end. " There may," as is said in the text, "be skirmishes on isolated and unimportant points," but the only difference thereafter must be as to the mode in which these can be educed from the fundamental fact. No doubt there is a vast number of apparently different theories upon the subject, the apparent differences arising from the use of metaphysical and frequently unintelligible terms. But in reality they are all reducible to one or other of those stated.

whicli their intuitive feelings revolted. They regarded theories involving such a philosophy as unworthy of notice. To examine them was considered as equivalent to giving tliem circulation, and was therefore counted mischievous, if not sinful. This notion was so intense and so widely spread, that even those who doubted its validity were intimidated from making the attempt. They were afraid of being charged with doing evil instead of good, and doubted the soundness of their own convictions when opposed to those of the great mass of the Christian world. The consequence was, that plausible arguments, left entirely unnoticed, began to ferment silently in men's minds, and especially in those of the young and thoughtless. In this way, under the form of insinuations, doubts, and conjectures, they acquired daily a wider circulation and more extended influence. It was only through pressure from without that men ultimately awakened out of this most delusive dream, to find that a new generation had been growing up around them, amongst whom, in many instances, apathetic indifference had taken the place of religious zeal, and not unfrequently the very foundations of religion had been shaken. The contempt thus exhibited towards such theories had therefore been a grievous error from the beginning. It is quite true, as we shall by-and-by more particularly show, that there is an intuitive feeling compelling us to believe in a

God ; and that feeling will, of course, more or less retain its influence in all circumstances. But, as with respect to every other feeling, the conviction originating from it is vague and indefinite. To give it practical power by making it precise, it is absolutely necessary that its character should be logically determined, and its tendency logically ascertained. Consequently, if plausible objections can be taken to the proof proposed without any reply being attempted, the result must of necessity be the generation of religious indifference and practical Atheism.

This is by so much the more to be expected in the present age, because it is a mistake to suppose that those objections to religion which the almost exclusive prosecution of physical science during modern times has infused into the minds of a large mass of society, had been thoroughly anticipated either by heathen or by Christian philosophers. On the contrary, heathen philosophers left even the general question most imperfectly argued ; and since the date of Christianity, the subject has been held in a great measure settled, and its details have been taken for granted. Until a recent period, consequently. Atheism has been almost unknown, except either under such gross or such subtilely metaphysical forms as to be incapable of doing any material evil. Latterly, however, this has been entirely changed. The rapid progress of physical science among all classes of society, lias fixed men's minds almost exclusively on the operation of physical causes. Hence there has been generated during the present age a tendency to materialistic modes of thinking, such .as we believe was never known during any previous period of human history. Thus has arisen a sort of habitual, though often scarcely conscious, belief in the action of a series of causes and effects operating in a circle, under which the phenomena of the universe may be regarded as an eternal succession altogether away from an efficient Creator. We say phenomena, because, according to this theory, phenomena are all that can be known ; though what may be the precise meaning attached to the word phenomena in this case, or how much it may embrace, it is certainly not very easy to ascertain. The absurdities of the theory, however, are kept out of view by its disciples ; and it is easy to understand how effective, on minds unaccustomed to think on almost anything save material objects, would be a philosophy which taught that doctrines af&rming phenomena to be referable to the action of a God, were the products of an ignorant age, and in the enlightened nineteenth century were at once therefore to be repudiated. It followed, of course, that henceforth we are to trust exclusively to the information of our senses, and that those things consequently which we can see, hear, taste, touch, and smell, are to be the alone foundations of our reasoning. With respect to the evidence of these, it is indicated that there can be no mistake.*

Under this theory, not only is profound thought rendered unnecessary, but a mode is pointed out under which the grossest of men's desires and worldly passions may be gratified without ultimate danger or present shame. It is not wonderful that a philosophy so simple, and so well suited to the ordinary character of the human mind, should, when uncontradicted, propagate itself widely, and at the same time take a strong hold on the feelings of those who are induced to adopt it. In these circumstances, it is a blessing to society that Christians have been compelled to conquer their superstitious dislike of even examining opinions which call in question the primary elements of religious truth. Such a line of procedure prevented the possibility of obviating misconceptions arising from the changes which the progress of various sciences wrought out on the character and tendencies of human thought. As

* This tendency is farther strengthened by the difficulty of reducing spiritual phenomena to their causes. It is a so much simpler method to assume an apparent though insufficient cause for phenomena than to trace the real cause, that we need not he astonished at men being seduced into adopting it. We shall find, however, that the true cause, when once discovered, is felt in all instances to be plain and unmistakable, and such is specially the case with the conclusions of a sound spiritual philosophy.

has been said, it was a complete mistake, originating in a misunderstanding of the constitution of human nature, and the arrangements under which Providence has provided a means for gradually generating a full appreciation of the ways and wonders of Almighty God. The most minute and sedulous examination of any objection that can be proposed against religion, can never be dangerous to religion, because religion is the highest and purest truth, and her lustre is dimmed by every shadow of doubt which is allowed to rest on the entire and unhesitating faith which she demands. It is clearly, therefore, the duty of all who revere religion and appreciate its infinite importance for the welfare of the human race, to meet every objection which may be taken to it, so far as this can be done effectually.

But there is still an additional call on our efi'orts for this purpose. On the determination of the principles of religion, however little it may be understood, depends the validity of those obligations which bind men together as members of society and portions of political combinations. Few, indeed, seem to have any notion of the length to which some of our most popular modern theories with respect to religion would lead us, because few seem to know the only solid foundation on which moral and political obligations can by possibility be rested. Apart from religion, it is demonstrable that the selfish theory is the only foundation either of morals or politics, and it can imply no obligation.

It may be said that even under this theory men would feel the necessity of allying themselves with each other, and of practically asserting relative duties, for the sake of their personal and selfish interests. But it must be remembered that different people look upon their personal and selfish interests under very different aspects, and that under such a theory it must be left to each individual to determine what in each case he might deem most advisable for the promotion of his own interests. Granting, however, that the mass of intelligent men would feel the necessity of defending and assisting each other under ordinary circumstances, it is clear that the extent of the feeling must in every instance depend on the measure of advantages which the several parties might believe themselves to have realised in comparison with others. The rich and the powerful no doubt would be zealous defenders of conservative principles, but it is absurd to suppose that the poor and the outcast would under any form of the selfish theory sympathise with them. They, on the contrary, would uphold the rights of physical force and the justice of the equalisation of property, and they would naturally combine for the purpose of giving effect to their theory. We must satisfy the poor and the outcast, not merely that there is a higher law than the law of selfishlO GENERAL INTRODUCTION.

ness, but that they have it in their power to realise a far higher position, and a far greater happiness, than the utmost gratification of selfisliness will afford, or there can be no real security either for life or property.* The amount of security which we have for either the one or the other depends on the universality and degree of such a conviction, which no doubt prevails more or less among all classes, though its effect be materially impaired by the vague form under which it is too often entertained. The Atheistic philosophers are in fact indebted for their own safety to the silent operation of the very principles which they seem to be zealous in repudiating and denying. For all human beings, even the most degraded, have some respect for life and property while they have

* There has been a most singular verification of this in the recent inquiry into the working of trades-unions, among which robbery, perjury, fire-raising, and murder have been systematically practised. It is a natural and necessary consequence of men without religious principle having an opportunity of secretly combining for the purpose of resisting measures which they believe inconsistent with their own interests. Had these men been influenced by religious principle, nothing could have induced them to do such deeds ; but apart from religious jirinciple, they have acted a perfectly intelligible part, and we should like to know on what ground they can be condemned. They are strictly following the utilitarian theory, seeking what they believe the "greatest happiness of the greatest number." This investigation into the working of trades-unions began after this book had been substantively finished, but we felt called upon to refer to an event which not only illustrates, but practically demonstrates, the validity of its whole argument. How thoroughly it does so will appear from the sequel.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION. II

the most shadowy idea that they are under the guardianship of an omnipotent Lawgiver. But convince them theoretically that any other man has as much right to property as its actual possessors, that there is just as little harm in taking the life of a man as of an ox or of a sheep, that no one has any authority, save from accident or force, to rule over his fellow-creatures, and as surely as human nature is human nature the theory will sooner or later be practically realised. It was for a few months nearly the theory of the French revolutionists, and the results, as is w^ell known, are recorded in letters of blood. It is the theory of all thieves, murderers, and traitors.

The consequences will be exactly proportional as men are taught to approximate to the belief of such a theory ; and it wiU not be very difficult in so far to teach it, since it is a theory in some respects most pleasing to humanity, and is indeed, apart from religion, the only possible theory, as we shall subsequently endeavour more particularly to prove.

We by no means deny that there are feelings of mutual relationship naturally existing in every human being. But experience demonstrates that these feelings will in a great measure be eradicated by that adoption of the selfish theory which results from doubt, and still more disbelief, of the moral attributes and moral superintendence of a God. Such feelings in that case can only act as motives to the extent that they overbear the impulses of our personal interests and passions ; and how trifling this would be, and is, need not be farther illustrated than by referring to the conduct of others, or even to the consciousness of our own minds. In fact, such feelings, apart from religion, merely constitute a form of selfishness, which practically has little or no influence when opposed to the gratification of our personal desires.