266 
THE PRINCIPLES OF MODERN PANTHEISTIC AND 
ATHEISTIC PHILOSOPHY , as exemplified in the last 
Works of Strauss and others. By the Rev. C. A. Row, 
M.A., Prebendary of St. Paul’s. 
T HE following passage from the Autobiography of the late 
Mr. J. S. Mill demands the earnest attention of all those 
who believe that there is a personal God, who is the moral 
governor of the universe : — a The world would be astonished if 
it knew how great a proportion of its brightest ornaments - 
of those most distinguished even in popular estimation for 
wisdom and virtue — are complete sceptics on religion, many of 
them refraining from avowal, less from personal considerations, 
than from a conscientious, though now in my opinion most 
mistaken apprehension, lest by speaking out what may tend to 
weaken existing beliefs, and by consequence, as they suppose, 
existing restraints, they should do harm rather than good/" 
2. The first question which strikes the mind on reading this 
passage is, is the assertion true, “ that a large proportion of the 
‘ world’s brightest ornaments f are complete sceptics on religion”? 
If so, it is of the most serious import. Mr. Mill has probably 
exerted a greater influence in the higher regions of thought than 
any writer of the existing generation. No holder of his philosophy 
can any longer entertain a doubt that certain portions of it are 
the philosophy of scepticism. The peculiar idiosyncrasies of 
mind which the Autobiography discloses, may have led Mr. 
Mill somewhat to over-estimate the sceptical tendencies of 
others. Yet the large number of writings, which have been 
recently published, of a similar tendency, is a sufficiently clear 
evidence that the principles of a pantheistic or atheistic philo- 
sophy are widely diffused among cultivated minds. Strauss, in 
his recent work, distinctly affirms that he is only acting as the 
spokesman of a wide range of pantheistic thought. 
3. I quite concur with Mr. Mill in opinion, that the time is 
come for speaking out plainly. In fact, unless morality is 
nothing better than expediency, there never has been a time 
when it has been right to profess adhesion to a system of 
thought, which in secret we utterly despise. I fully concede 
that theologians no less than philosophers would do well to act 
