THE BASIS OF FAITH.
[TO THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR."] SIR,—The review of Wace's Bampton Lectures on " The Foun- dations of Faith," in the Spectator of the 17th July, mentions my work on " The Scientific Bases of Faith," as one which " treats the problem of faith as part of the problem of know- ledge." In the sense in which you appear to mean this, it is not my view. The intention of my work is partly to show that the new conceptions of the Universe which we have learned from such teachers as Lyell and Darwin, form a better intellec- tual basis for the Christian Faith than the old conceptions ; but partly also to show that religious faith is not sui generis, but is the highest development of the instinctive trust of children in their parents. I agree with all you say in the review in question about the essentially personal character of faith. It is very interesting to observe how this truth is pre- served in devotional utterances of all kinds, even when it is lost in formal theology.—I am, Sir, &c.,
JOSEPH JOHN MURPHY.
Old Forge, Dunnturry, County Antrim, July 25th.
P.S.—Since willing the above, I have read Dr. Carpenter's letter, published by you on the 24th, in which he says that " every believer's God is neither more nor less than his own idea of God." This seems sell-evident, and yet it is not true. Is the child's father nothing more to the child than the child's own idea of his father ? Dr. Carpenter would, perhaps, be right if God had left us to discover him, as we have discovered gravita- tion and electricity ; but our relation to God—not as children, but as learners—is fundamentally changed by the fact of reve- lation.
Previous page
