516 “ Ultimate Religious Ideas." [September, 
unto you.” It is the inculcation of the bond of brotherhood, 
the link-chain of humanity, and may be considered as an 
ultimate religious truth, a fundamental basis, and “ a vital 
element in all religions.” 
Mr. Spencer appears to be ignorant of this general moral 
law, or, if not ignorant, he is open to a graver imputation. 
He says, after a peculiar kind of reasoning (page 45), “Thus 
while other constituents of religious creeds drop away, this 
remains (inscrutableness of creation) and grows even more 
manifest, and so is shown to be an essential constituent.” 
He ends his exposition by saying “ that the power which 
the Universe manifests is to us inscrutable,” which he em- 
phasised in the following observation : — “ Instead of dis- 
closing afundamental verity existing in each, our investigation 
seems rather to show there is no fundamental verity con- 
tained in any.” 
As far as space would admit a presentment is made of 
Mr. Spencer’s Theology. It must be obvious to all who 
choose to think, that the mere presentment of Mr. Spencer’s 
propositions, as subjects to reason upon, contain within them- 
selves the negation of the whole of his hypotheses, viz., that 
they are unthinkable. What process of reasoning can be 
carried on without thought ? To a common apprehension 
thought, thinking, and thinkable, are very much alike. 
Mr. Spencer has a great name, is a great thinker, and a 
very able man ; but it does not follow that the conclusions 
of great thinkers are always correct or conclusive. At one 
time he pictures an impossible Utopia (Sociology); at 
another introduces confusion into subjects which common 
sense not only readily assents to, but which every experience 
confirms. Logical disquisitions are useful as mental exer- 
cises, and there their uses end. We have then a war of 
words which each Professor construes in accordance with 
his own formula, and as a consequence we have a Babel of 
confusion. Mill has one interpretation, Sir William Hamil- 
ton another, Kant another, Hegel another, with Spencer, 
and a whole host of logical metaphysicians whose names 
are legion : in this aspect well might Lewes assert that a 
system of philosophy is impossible. Mr. Spencer is largely 
quoted by a know-nothing class of would-be philosophers. 
I have heard Mr. Spencer cited as an authority for the 
greatest absurdities, and this because he has not been read, 
or, where picking has been adopted, the particular selection 
has not been understood ; hence an incredible amount of 
mischief has resulted. The crudities of these would-be 
philosophers have been adopted by an audience ignorant as 
