406 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



kind ; and in nothing has that prog- 

 ress been so clearly evinced as in the 

 gradual elevation of man's conceptions 

 of the character of the deity he wor- 

 ships. During all the primitive ages, re- 

 ligion was idolatry, and still is so, almost 

 all over the world. But with growing 

 intelligence there slowly arises a higher 

 idea of the Divine Nature. Polytheism 

 passes into monotheism, and the gross, 

 limited, anthropomorphic idea of God 

 gives place to the loftier ideal of an " In- 

 finite and Eternal Spirit." In this clear- 

 ing away of limitations how far was 

 the work to go, and what to he finally 

 left ? The theologians had been driving 

 destructive criticism to its last extreme, 

 with but little apparent care for the 

 consequences. There grew up a vigor- 

 ous ecclesiastical agnosticism, asserted 

 even by the fathers of the Church. 

 Clemens Alexandrinus (a. d. 200) says 

 of God, " We know not what he is, but 

 only what he is not." Cyril of Jeru- 

 salem (a. d. 350) affirms, " To know God 

 is beyond man's power." St. Augus- 

 tine (a.d. 400) observes, "Bare is the 

 mind that in speaking of God knows 

 what it meaus." John of Damascus 

 (a. d. 800) declares, " What is the sub- 

 stance of God or how he exists in all 

 things, we are agnostics, and can not say 

 a word." Duns Scotus (a. d. 1300) re- 

 marks: "Is God accessible to our rea- 

 son? I hold that he is not." This 

 tendency to remove the Divine Nature 

 beyond the grasp of reason, and to hold 

 that "a God understood is no God at 

 all," has grown in strength in modern 

 times, and reached its full expression 

 in the theological philosophy of Hamil- 

 ton and Mansell,. which landed inquiry 

 upon this subject in blank negation. 

 Finding that the " Infinite and Eternal 

 Spirit" transcended and baffled all rea- 

 son, they assumed that reason brings 

 us to an infinite nothing, so that we 

 have no alternative but to give up the 

 idea of an Infinite Power, or fall bacfc 

 upon faith. Mr. Spencer strenuously 

 resisted this conclusion. Ho main- 



tained that the most inexorable logic 

 brings us not to an Infinite Nothing, 

 but to an Infinite Something ; and, al- 

 though this "Eternal Spirit" transcends 

 the reach of reason, and is " past finding 

 out," yet that its existence is the pro- 

 foundest of all verities. Where the 

 case broke down in the hands of the 

 theological analysts, he insists that it is 

 demonstrably the strongest. Whether 

 he proves his case is not here the ques- 

 tion ; we only declare that such is his 

 position, which is in dead antagonism 

 to atheism. But it is proper to say 

 that many of his able opponents ac- 

 knowledge that Mr. Spencer has con- 

 tributed new and powerful arguments 

 for the existence of an " Infinite and 

 Eternal Spirit." In the presence of 

 these facts, well known to all who care 

 to know, what shall we say of the ve- 

 racity, the honor, or even the decency, 

 of those who flippantly reiterate this 

 groundless charge ? 



And it is important here still further 

 to observe that Mr. Spencer is not a de- 

 nier or antagonist of religion. He holds 

 it to be a reality, a great truth ; in short, 

 nothing less than an essential and in- 

 destructible element of human nature. 

 The religious institutions of the world, 

 he maintains, represent a genuine and 

 universal feeling in the race just as 

 really as any other institutions. With 

 the accessory superstitions which in 

 all ages of ignorance have overgrown 

 and perverted the religious sentiment, 

 he is, of course, not in agreement ; and 

 he maintains that the confounding of 

 these with the religious sentiment it- 

 self, is a mischievous mistake of relig- 

 ionists and anti-religionists alike. And 

 he furthermore holds that science, in 

 clearing away these superstitions, is 

 bringing us ever nearer to the under- 

 lying truth, and is, therefore, doing the 

 highest religious work. And, besides, 

 in all his discussions of religious sub- 

 jects, though bold, he is reverent, re- 

 spectful to sincerity, tolerant of honest 

 prejudice, and never wantonly irritat- 



