INVOLUTION.*
LORD ERNEST Heltriacm has written a book about religion, and has made the book very interesting. In this very import-
ant particular it is impossible not to praise his work. But if he has striven to interest religions people he has allowed him- self to give them much pain. The odium theologioum is plainly confined to no set of opinions, and this preacher of undogmatio ' Christianity maintains the very worst traditions of theological dispute. He pours contempt upon the most cherished doctrines of the Churches and, incidentally, upon those who hold them. "The dogmas on which we lean to-day were invented nearly sixteen hundred years ago by a coloured man named Augustine," we read. The word " invented " is simply absurd when applied to those imperfect expressions of permanent human emotions which have received the name of dogmas, but which are to our author simply a schedule of improbable occurrences, and St. Augustine was no more black because he was born in Numidia and educated at Carthage than those English friends of Lord Ernest Hamilton's who were born in Calcutta are brown. Again, it may be perfectly fair to fulminate against sacerdotalism ; but to say that the clergy themselves have no real belief in the efficacy of the Sacraments is simply monstrous.
• involution. By Lord Ernest Hamilton. London • Mills and Book [7., 6c1. net.]
Ib comes to a wholesale charge of hypocrisy against an honourable profession. Lord Ernest Hamilton's assertions axe at times so sweeping as to be ridiculous. "The clergy to a man know the unreality of what they dispense " ! we read. Such a statement is on the face of it absurd. One must not, however, in pointing out our author's theological ferocity, become guilty of a like immoderation. He is not aiming any blow at the Christian religion; be is simply endeavouring to prove, and in this he deserves our sympathy, that the Gospel of Christ and the Creeds of the Churches are not identical. If we use the word Christian as an intellectual designation we think that the writer of this book has as good a right to the name as many a Catholic, many a Wesleyan, or many a member of the Church of England. Here is his statement of his own attitude. " However irregular our beliefs," he says, " we still find Him (Christ) the central figure in the world's history, the human personality for love of whom thousands have gladly died. We still find Him the inspiration for all that is best and noblest in us, and—over and above all—we still find Him the revelation of the true God."
Admitting, then, that Lord Ernest Hamilton is speaking —rather fiercely no doubt—as a Christian to Christians, his position becomes very interesting. Here is a man admitting himself the intellectual captive of Christ while in intellectual disagreement with all those bodies of men who have hitherto considered themselves His followers. That his position is sincere is perfectly evident. He owes nothing to tradition, nothing to that literary feeling which leads so many of us to doubt how far our faith is influenced by a delight in letters. For the Hebrew Scriptures our author has no feeling -whatever. " Jehovah," as He is represented in the Old Testa- ment, is to him a tribal and " malevolent " Deity, of whose cult the "prophets were the poets and the priests the butchers." Even the "poets," he explains, were hardly less material than the priests. The visions of the seers—the revelations of the human heart to be found in their words, the thirst for God, the agonies of repentance, the expressions of human love to be found throughout the length and breadth of the Scriptures—leave him cold. Apparently to him it is all utterly barbaric; he never for one moment enters into the spirit of the scribes. David, be tells us, owed to an able general his reputation for a favourite with God; but why not to the fact that he was—and is still, after all these ages—a favourite with man It is strange how a want of imagination leads men to overlook the obvious.
But to return to our point. Lord Ernest Hamilton has, so far as the Hebrew Scriptures are concerned, a great dislike to the Bible, and his attitude to the New Testament, where it does not report the words of Christ., is often one of hos- tility. His allegiance is to one Master, and to Him only. Cer- tainly to the form of Protestantism which Newman called "the slavish worship of a book" he owes nothing, for as a book he has literally no reverence for the Scrip- tures whatever. If the words of Christ had been reported in a daily paper they would have had the same effect upon this ardent but eccentric disciple. Of course he cannot keep his hand from the blue pencil even when he is reading the Gospels. He accepts and rejects on a system which is very simple. Every word which makes for what he vaguely calls dogma he cuts out, but be accepts with joy the spiritual teaching, the moral teaching, and the assur- ance of immortality. If Lord Ernest Hamilton's fellow- Christians, then, can forgive him his violent onslaughts upon the orthodox, his complete indifference to literature, and such terrible misconceptions of men and of the human heart as make him regard St. Paul's teachings about the Atonement as " a tactical move to induce the Judaistic party to recognize the rights of Gentiles," and then to speak of it as an " election dodge," they will find he has a great deal to say which may be very useful to them. The following argu- ment for immortality, for instance, is potent. "If we can prove free volition," he says, "we prove purpose ; and if we prove purpose we finally prove immortality." If man has the will "he is a god shaping the course of eternity." "Have we free will," he goes on, "or is every act, word, and thought deter- mined by cast-iron muscle finales? If the former, we prove purpose and man's inalienable participation in the destinies of the universe; if the latter, we become mere cogs in a wheel that turns in an endless chain." We would also call our
readers' attention to the chapter on Instinct, which is full of interest and suggestion. The instinct of animals is unfailing. They trust to it and accomplish what their reason is wholly inadequate to perform. We are accustomed to speak as though man had little instinct ; but we forget his religious instinct, Lord Ernest Hamilton tells us; may he not trust in that and find salvation?
The real worth of this hook consists, we think, in its witness to this instinct. It should be a great help to those who would analyse it, for it stands out alone. As a rule, a religious instinct - strong enough to inspire intellectual devotion to the Person of Christ is accompanied by emotions and cravings of which the writer is apparently wholly incapable. No reverence for the religious teaching of his youth appears to remain in him. In his virulent hatred of Evangelical theology he fails to see that the soul of Christianity flourished in that body of doctrine. The word "grace" suggests nothing to his mind but the attri- bution of " capricious nepotism " to God. He has apparently no prejudice in favour of religious people; he has none of the natural' human craving to get outside the region of law and to believe in the supernatural. Emotional religious literature has no mean- ing for him. He stands towards it in the scoffing attitude of a matter-of-fact boy to whom the two great interpreters, Trouble and Joy, have not yet spoken. We get an impression as we read that he has no fear of death. All the same his religious attitude is one of adoration; and though he scorns the word Creed, he believes in Christ. "Peace be to all such" will be the comment of most Christian laymen.
We regret his uncharitableness ; but for all that his book is a potent witness to Christianity and to true religion, and may prove a far better foundation for faith in Christ than the teachings of many of those who will condemn him as irreligious.
Previous page
