5;i.'^'^;'i if^iiff??nnfv : ; . , , :;jrm"f|y| IM^ «i:il.::^;. , ^io^i!, }5 »ni5d}' Hi Hi DISCOURSES THE SCOPE AND NATURE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. ADDRESSED TO THE CATHOLICS OF DUBLIN. JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, D.D., PRESIDENT OF THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, AND PRIEST OF THE ORATORY OF ST. PHILIP NERI. " attingit safientia a fine usque ad finem fortiter, et disponit omnia suaviter"'. DUBLIN: JAMES DUFFY, 7 WELLINGTON QUAY, PUBLISHER TO HIS GRACE THE CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN. 1852. J. F. FOWLER, PRINTER, 3 CROW STREET, DAME STREET, DUBLIN. Ilospes eram, et collegistis Me. N4^^ IN GRATEFUL NEVER-DYIXG REMEMBRANCE OF HIS MANY FRIENDS AND BENEFACTORS, LIVING AND DEAD, AT HOME AND ABROAD, IN IRELAND, GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, IN BELGIUM, GERMANY, POLAND, ITALY, AND MALTA, IN NORTH AMERICA, AND OTHER COUNTRIES, WHO, BY THEIR RESOLUTE PRAYERS AND PENANCES, AND BY THEIR GENEROUS STUBBORN EFFORTS, AND BY THEIR MUNIFICENT ALMS, HAVE BROKEN FOR HIM THE STRESS OF A GREAT ANXIETY, THESE DISCOURSES, OFFERED TO OUR LADY AND ST. PHILIP ON ITS RISE, COMPOSED UNDER ITS PRESSURE, FINISHED ON THE EVE OF ITS TERMINATION, ARE RESPECTFULLY AND AFFECTIONATELY INSCRIBED BY THE AUTHOR. IN FEST. PKiESKNT. B.V.M. 1852. G62G81 PREFACE. The view taken of a University in the Dis- courses which form this Volume, is of the following kind : - that it is a place of teaching universal knowledge. This unplies that its object is, on the one hand, intellectual, not moral; and, on the other, that it is the dif- fusion and extension of knowledge, rather than the advancement. If its object were scientific and philosophical discovery, I do not see why a University should have students ; if religious training, I do not see how it can be the seat of pliilosophy and science. Such is a University in its essence, and independently of its relation to the Church. But, practically speaking, it cannot fulfil its VI PREFACE. object duly, such as I have described it, without the Church's assistance ; or, to use the theological term, the Church is necessary for its integrity. Not that its main charac- ters are changed by this incorporation : it still has the office of intellectual education ; but the Church steadies it in the performance of that office. Such are the main principles of the Dis- courses which follow ; though it would be unreasonable for me to expect, that I have treated so large and important a field of thought with the fulness and precision, neces- sary to secure me from incidental misconcep- tions of my meaning on the part of the reader. It is true, there is nothing novel or singular in the argument which I have been j)ursuing, but this does not protect me fi^om such misconceptions ; for the very circum- stance that the views 1 have been delineating are not original with me, may lead to false notions as to my relations of opinion towards those, from wlioin I hap])ened in tlie first instance to leai'n them, and may cause me to PREFACE. Vll be interpreted by the objects or sentiments of schools, to which I should be simply opposed. For instance, some persons may be tempted to complain, that I have servilely followed the Enghsh idea of a University, to the dis- paragement of that Knowledge, which I pro- fess to be so strenuously upholding ; and they may anticipate that an academical system, formed upon my model, will result in nothing better or higher than in the production of that antiquated variety of human natm-e and remnant of feudalism, called " a gentleman".* Now, I have anticipated this charge in various parts of my discussion ; if, however, any Cathohc is found to prefer it (and to Cathohcs of com^se this volume is addressed), I would have him first of all ask himself the previous question, ichat he conceives to be the reason contemplated by the Holy See, in recommending just now to the Irish Church the establishment of a Cathohc University? Has the Supreme Pontiff* recommended it for the sake of the Sciences, which are to be the *Vid. Hubcr's English Universities, London, 1813, vol. ii,, part 1. pp. 321, etc. viii PREFACE. matter, or rather of the Students, who are to be the subjects of its teaching? Has he any obh- gation or duty at all towards secular knowledge as such ? Would it become his Apostolical Ministry, and his descent from the Fisher- man, to have a zeal for the Baconian or other philosophy of man for its own sake? or, on the other hand, does the Vicar of Christ con- template such achievements of the intellect, as far as he contemplates them, solely and simply in their relation to the interests of Re- vealed Truth? Has lie any more direct juris- diction over the wisdom than over the civil power of this world? Is he bound by office or by vow, to be the preacher of the theory of gravitation, or a martyr for electro-magnet- ism? Would he be acquitting himself of the dispensation committed to him, if he were smitten with an abstract love of these matters, however true, or beautiful, or ingenious, or use- ful? W hat he does, he does for the sake of Re- ligion ; if he looks with satisfaction on strong temporal governments, which promise perpe- tuity, it is for the sake of Religion ; and if PREFACE. IX he encourages and patronizes art and science, it is for the sake of ReHgion. lie rejoices in the widest and most philosophical systems of intellectual education, from an intimate con- viction that Truth is his real ally, as it is his profession; and that Knowledge and Reason are sure ministers to Faith. This heing undeniable, it is ])lain, that, when he suggests to the Irish Hierarchy the estabUshment of a University, his first and chief and direct object is, not science, ai-t, profes- sional skill, literature, the discovery of know- ledge, but some benefit or other, by means of literature and science, to his own children ; not indeed their formation on any narrow or fantastic type, as, for instance, that of an "English Gentleman" may be called, but their exercise and growth in certain habits, moral or intellectual. Nothing short of this can be his aim, if, as becomes the Successor of the Apostles, he is to be able to say with St. Paul, "Xon judicavi me scire aliquid inter vos, nisi Jesuni Christum, et hunc crucifixum". Just as a commander wishes to have tall and well- PREFACE. formed and vigorous soldiers, not from any abstract devotion to the military standard of height or age, but for the purposes of war, and no one thinks it anything but natural and praiseworthy in liim, to be contemplating, not abstract qualities, but his own living and breathing men ; so, in like manner, when the Church founds a University, she is not cherishing talent, genius, or knowledge, for their own sake, but for the sake of her children, with a view to their spiritual wel- fare, and their religious influence and useful- ness, with the object of training them to fill their respective posts in life better, and mak- ing them more intelligent, capable, active members of society. Nor can it justly be said that in thus acting she sacrifices Science, and perverts a Univer- sity from its proper end, under a pretence of fulfilling the duties of her mission, as soon as it is taken into account, that there are other insti- tutions, far more suited to act as instruments of stimulating philosophical inquiry and extend- ing the boundaries of ovu* knowledge than a PREFACE. XI University. Such for instance, are the hterary and scientific "Academies", which are so cele- Ijrated in Italy and France, and which have frequently been connected with Universities, as committees, or, as it were, congregations or delegacies subordinate to them. Thus the present Royal Society originated in Charles the Second's time, in Oxford ; such just now are the Ashmolean and Architectural Socie- ties in the same seat of learning, which have risen in our own time. Such too is the British Association, a migratory body, which at least at times is found in the halls of the Protestant Universities of the United Kingdom, and the faults of which lie, not in its exclusive devo- tion to science, but in graver matters which it is irrelevant here to enter upon. Such again is the Antiquarian Society, the Royal Academy for the Fine Arts, and others which might be mentioned. Such is the sort of in- stitution, which primarily contemplates Science itself, and not students ; and, in thus speak- ing, I am saying nothing of my own, being supported by no less an authority than Car- Xll PREFACE. dinal Gerdil. " Ce n' est pas", he says, " qii' il y ait aucune veritable opposition entre 1' esprit des Academies et celui des Universites ; ce sont sevilement des vues differentes. Les Universites sont etablies pour enseigner les sciences aujc eleves qui veulent s'y former ; les Academies se proposent de nouvelles re- cherches a faire dans la carriere des sciences. Les Universites d' Italic ont fourni des su- jets qui ont fait honneur aux Academies; et celles-ci ont donne aux Universites des Pro- fesseurs, qui ont rempli les cliaires avec la plus grande distinction".* The nature of the case and the history of pliilosophy combine to recommend to us this "division of" intellectual "labour" between Academies aud Universities. To discover and to teach are distinct functions ; they are also distinct gifts, and are not commonly found united in the same person. He too who spends his day in dispensing his existing knowledge to all comers, is unlikely to have either leisure or energy to acquire new. The * Opcrc, t. o, p. 353. PREFACE. xiii conunuu sense of mankind has associated the search after truth with seclusion and quiet. The irreatest thinkers have been too intent on their subject to admit of interruption ; they have been men of absent minds and idosyncratic habits, and have, more or less, shunned the lecture room and the public school. Pythagoras, the light of Magna Grsecia, hved for a time in a cave : Thales, the hght of Ionia, lived unmarried and in private, and refused the invitations of princes. Plato withdrew irom Athens to the groves of Academus. Aristotle gave twenty years to a stuchous disciplesliip under him. Friar Ba- con Uved in his tower upon the Isis ; Newton in an intense severity of meditation which al- most shook his reason. The great discoveries in chemistry and electricity were not made in Universities. Observatories are more fre- quently out of Universities than in them, and even when within their bounds need have no moral connexion with them. Porson had no classes ; Ehiisley lived good part of his hfe in the countrv. I do not say that there xiv PREFACE. are not great examples the other way, per- haps Socrates, certainly Lord Bacon ; still 1 think it must be allowed on the whole, that, while teaching involves external engagements, the natural home for experiment and specula- tion is retirement. Returning then to the consideration of the question, from which we may seem to have digressed, thus much we have made good, — that, whether or no a Catholic University should put before it, as its great object, to make its students "gentlemen", still to make them some- thing or other is its great object, and not simply to protect the interests and advance the dominion of Science. If then this may be taken for granted, as I think it may, the only point which remains to be settled is, whether I have formed a probable conception of the sort of benefit which the Holy See has intended to confer on Catholics who speak the English tongue, by recommending to the Irish Hierarchy the establishment of a Uni- versity ; and this I now proceed to consider. Here then, it is natural to ask those who PREFACE. XV are interested in the question, whether any better interpretation of the recommendation of the Holy See can be given, than that which I have suggested in this Vohime. Certainly it does not seem to me rash to pro- nounce, that, whereas Protestants have great advantages of education in the Schools, Col- leges, and Universities of the United Kingdom, om* ecclesiastical rulers have it in purpose, that Catholics should enjoy the like advan- tages, whatever they are, to the full. I con- ceive they view it as prejudicial to the interests of Religion, that there should be any cidtivation of mind bestowed upon Protes- tants, which is not given to their own youth also. As they wish their schools for the poorer and middle classes to be at least on a par with those of Protestants, they contemplate the same thing as regards that higher educa- tion which is given to comparatively the few. Protestant youths, who can spare the time, continue their studies till the age of twenty-one or tw^enty-two ; thus they employ a time of life all-important and especially favourable to xvi PREFACE. mental culture. I conceive that our Prelates are impressed with the fact and its consequences, that a youth who ends his education at seventeen, is no match (ccBteris paribus J for one who ends it at twenty-one. All classes indeed of the community are impressed with a fact so obvious as this. The consequence is, that Catholics who aspire to be on a level with Protestants in discipline and refinement of intellect, have recourse to Protestant Universities to obtain what they cannot find at home. Here then is an addi- tional reason, — assuming, that is (as the Re- scripts from Propaganda allow me to do), that Protestant education is inexpedient for our youth, — why those advantages, whatever they are, which the Protestant sects dispense through the medium of Protestantism, should be accessible to Catholics in a Catholic form. Wliat are these advantages ? I repeat, they are in one word the culture of the in- tellect. Insulted, robbed, oppressed, and thrust aside. Catholics in these islands have not been in a condition for centuries to PREFACE. Xvii attempt the sort of education, which is necessary for the man of the world, the statesman, the great proprietor, or the opu- lent gentleman. Their legitimate stations, duties, employments, have been taken fi-om them, and the qualifications withal, social and intellectual, both for reversing the forfeiture, and for doing justice to the reversal. The time is come when this moral cUsability nmst be removed. Our desideratum is, not the manners and habits of gentlemen ;— these can be, and are, acquired in various other wavs, by good society, by foreign travel, by tlie innate grace and dignity of the Cathohc mind; — but the force, the steadiness, the comprehensive- ness and the flexibility of intellect, the com- mand over our own powers, the instinctive just estimate of things as they pass before us, whicb sometimes indeed is a natural gift, but com- monly is not gained without much effort and the exercise of years. Tliis is real cultivation of mind; and I do not deny that the characteristic excellences of a gentleman are included in it. Nor need we be ashamed to admit it, since XVlll PREFACE. the time the Poet wrote, that "Ingenuas didi- cisse fidehter artes, EmoUit mores". Certainly a hberal education does manifest itself in a com-tesy, propriety, and polish of word and action, which is beautiful in itself, and ac- ceptable to others ; but it does much more. It brings the mind into form, for the mind is like the body. Boys outgrow their shape and then* strength ; their limbs have to be knit together, and their constitution needs tone. Mistaldng animal spirits for nerve, and over-confident in their health, ignorant what they can bear and how to manage themselves, they are immoderate and extra- vagant ; and fall into sharp sicknesses. This is an emblem of their minds ; at first they have no principles laid down within them as a foundation for the intellect to build upon ; they have no discriminating convictions, and no grasp of consequences. In consequence they talk at random, if they talk much, and cannot help being flippant, or what is emphatically called '^young'\ They are merely dazzled by phenomena, instead of perceiving things. PREFACE. XIX It were well, if none remained boys all their lives ; but what is more common than the sight of grown men, talking on political or moral or religious subjects, in that offliand, idle way, which we signify by the word un- real ? " That they simply do not know what they are talking about", is the spontaneous silent remark of any man of sense wlio hears them. Hence such persons have no difficulty in contradicting themselves in suc- cessive sentences, without being conscious of it. Hence others, whose defect in intellectual training is more latent, have their most un- fortunate crotchets, as they are called, or hobbies, which deprive them of the influence which their estimable qualities would other- wise seciu-e. Hence others can never look straight before them, never see the point, and have no difficulties in the most difficult sub- jects. Others are hopelessly obstinate and prejudiced, and retm^n the next moment to their old opinions, after they have been di'iven from them, without even an attempt to ex- plain why. Others are so intemperate and XX PREFACE. intractable, that there is no greater calamity for a good cause than that they should get hold of it. It is very plain from the very particulars I have mentioned, that, in this delineation of intellectual infirmities, I am drawing from Protestantism and Protestants; I am referring to what meets us in every railway carriage, in every coffee-room or tahle-dliote, in every mixed company. Nay, it is wonderful, that, with all their advantages, so many Protestants leave the University, with so Httle of real liberahty and refinement of mind, in consequence of the disciphne to which they have been subjected. Much allowance must be made here for original nature; much, for the detestable narrowness and (I cannot find a better word) the priggishness of their religion. CathoHcs, on the other hand, are, compared with them, almost born gentlemen. Take the same ranks in the two Religions, and the fact is undeniable. The simplicity, courtesy, and intelligence, for instance, of the peasants in Ireland and France have often been remarked upon. Still, after all, in this PREFACE. XXI province, which is not of a distinctly rehgious nature, Cathohcism does Uttle more than create instincts and impulses, which it requires a steady training to mould into definite and permanent hahits. They may begin well, and end ill. The want of that training, in Catholics, so far as there is a want, is a positive loss to them ; and the existence of it among Protestants, as far as it exists, is to them a positive gain. When the intellect has once been properly trained and formed to have a connected view or grasp of things, it will display itself with more or less effect according to its particular quahty and measm-e in the individual. In the generahty it is visible in good sense, sobriety of thought, reasonableness, candour, self-command, and steadiness of view. In some it will have developed habits of busi- ness, power of influencing others, and saga- city. In others it will eUcit the talent of philosophical speculation, and lead the mind forward to eminence in tliis or that intellec- tual department. In all it will be a faculty xxii PREFACE. of entering with comparative ease into any subject of thought, and of taking up with ap- titude any science or profession. All this it will be and do in a measure, even when the mental formation be made after a model but partially true; for, as far as effectiveness goes, even false views of things have more influence and inspire more respect than none at all. Men who fancy they see what is not are more energetic, and make their way better, than those who see notliing ; and so the undoubt- ing infidel, the fanatic, the bigot, are able to do much, while the mere hereditary Chi'istian, who has never realized the truths which he holds, is able to do nothing. But, if consis- tency of view can add so much strength even to error, what may it not be expected to furnish to the dignity, the energy, and the influence of Truth ! Some one, however, will perhaps object that I am but advocating that spm-ious philo- sophism, which shows itself in what, for want of a word, I may call " viewiness", when I speak so much of the formation, and consequent PREFACE. XX 111 grasp, of the intellect. It may be said that the theory of University Education, which I have been dehneating, if acted upon, would teach youths notliing soundly or thoroughly, and would dismiss them with nothing better than brilHant general views about all things whatever. This indeed would be a most serious objec- tion, if well founded, to what I have advanced in this Volume, and would deserve and would gain my immediate attention, had I any reason to think that 1 could not remove it at once, by a simple explanation of what I consider the true mode of educating, were this the place to do so. But these Discourses are dii^ected simply to the consideration of the aims and principles of Education. Suffice it then to say here, that I hold very strongly that the first step in intellectual training is to impress upon a boy's mind the idea of science, method, order, principle, and system ; of rule and exception, of richness and harmony. This is commonly and excellently done by beginning with Grammar ; nor can too XXIV TREFACE. great accui^acy, or minuteness and subtlety of teaching be used towards him, as his faculties expand, with this simple view. Hence it is that critical scholarship is so important a discipline for him, when he is leaving school for the University. A second science is the Mathematics : this should follow Grammar, still with the same object, viz., to give him a conception of development and arrangement from and around a common centre. Hence it is that Chronology and Geography are so necessary for him, when he reads History, which is otherwise little better than a story-book. Hence too Metrical Com- position, when he reads poetry ; in order to stimulate his powers into action in every practicable way, and to prevent a passive reception of images and ideas which may else pass out of the mind as soon as they have entered it. Let him once gain this habit of me- thod, of starting from fixed points, of making his ground good as he goes, of distinguishing what he knows from what he does not, and I conceive he will be gradually initiated into PREFACE. XXV the largest and truest philosophical views, and will feel nothing but impatience and disgust at the random theories and imposing sopliistries and dashing paradoxes, which carry away half-formed and superficial intellects. Such parti-colom'ed ingenuities are indeed one of the chief evils of the day, and men of real talent are not slow to minister to them. An intellectual man, as the world now con- ceives of him, is one who is full of " views ", on all subjects of philosophy, on all matters of the day. It is almost thought a disgrace not to have a view at a moment's notice on any question from the Personal Advent to the Cholera or Mesmerism. This is owing in great measure to the necessities of perio- dical literature, now so much in request. Every quarter of a year, every month, every day, there must be a supply, for the gratifica- tion of the public, of new and luminous theories on the subjects of religion, foreign politics, home politics, civil economy, finance, trade, agriculture, emigration, and the colo- nics. Slavery, the gold fields, German philoso- XXVI PREFACE. phy, the French Empire, Welhngton, Peel, Ireland, must all be practised on, day after day, by what are called original tliinkers. As the great man's guest must produce his good stories or songs at the evening banquet, as the platform orator exhibits his telling facts at mid-day, so the journalist lies under the stern obligation of extemporising his lucid views, leading ideas, and nutshell truths for the breakfast table. The very nature of periodical literature, broken into small wholes, and demanded punctually to an hour, in- volves this extempore philosophy. " Almost all the Ramblers ", says Boswell of Johnson, " were written just as they were wanted for the press ; he sent a certain portion of the copy of an essay, and wrote the remainder while the former part of it was printing". Few men have the gifts of Johnson, who to great vigour and resource of intellect, when it was fairly roused, united a rare common- sense and a conscientious regard for veracity, which preserved him from flippancy or extra- vagance in writing. Few men are Johnsons ; PREFACE. XXVU yet liow many men at this day are assailed by incessant demands on their mental powers, which only a productiveness like his could suitably supply ! There is a demand for a reckless originality of thought, and a spark- ling plausibility of argument, which he would have despised, even if he could have dis- played ; a demand for crude theory and un- sound pliilosophy, rather than none at all. It is a sort of repetition of the " Quid novi?" of the Areopagus, and it must have an an- swer. Men must be foimd, who can treat, where it is necessary, like the Athenian Sophist, de omni scibili, " Grammaticus, Rhetor, Geometres, Pictor, Aliptes, Augur, Schoenobatca, Medicus, Magus, omnia novit". I am speaking of such writers with a feel- ing of real sympathy for men who are imder the rod of a cruel slavery. I have never been in such circumstances mvself, nor in the temptations which they involve ; but most men who have had to do with composition, must know the distress which at times it occasions them to have to write — a distress XXV 111 TREFACE, sometimes so keen and so specific, that it resembles nothing else than bodily pain. That pain is the token of the wear and tear of mind ; and, if works done comparatively at leisure involve such mental fatigue and ex- haustion, what must be the toil of those whose intellects are to be flaunted daily be- fore the public in full di^ess, and that dress ever new and varied, and spun, like the silk- worm's, out of themselves ! Still, whatever true sympathy we may feel for the ministers of this dearly purchased luxury, and whatever sense we may have of the great intellectual power which the literature in question dis- plays, we cannot honestly close our eyes to the evil. One other remark suggests itself, which is the last I shall think it necessary to make. The authority, which in former times was lodged in Universities, now resides in very great measm'e in that literary world, as it is called, to which I have been alluding. This is not satisfactory, if, as no one can deny, its teach- PREFACE. XXIX ing bo sly (!(• I feel, ever ^vill I protest, fur I cnn appeal to the ample testimony of histoiy to l)ear mo out, that, in questions of right and wrong there is nothing really strong in the whole world, nothing de- cisive and operative, hut the voice of him, to wliom have been committed the keys of the kingdom and the oversight of Christ's flock. That voice is now, as ever it has been, a real authority, infallible when it teaches, prosperous when it commands, ever taking the lead wisely and distinctly in its own province, adding certainty to Avhat is probable, and persuasion to what is certain. Before it speaks, the most saintly may mistake; and after it has spoken, the most gifted must obey. I have said this in explanation ; but it has an ap- plication if you will let me so say, far beyond myself. Perhaps we have all need to be reminded, in one way or another, as regards our habitual view of things, if not our formal convictions, of the greatness of au- thority and the intensity of power, which accompany the decisions of the Holy See. I can fancy, Gentle- men, among those w^ho hear me there may be those who would be willing to acquit the principles of Edu- cation which I am to advocate of all fault w^hatever, except that of being impracticable. I can fancy them to grant to me, that those principles are most correct and most obvious, simply irresistible on paper, yet, after all, nothing more than the dreams of men who live out of the world, and who do not see iNTiidDicriux. 23 tlie ilitTiculty of keeping Catholicism anyhow afloat on the bosom of this wonderful nineteenth century. Proved, indeed, those principles are to demonstra- tion, but they will not work. Nay, it was my own admission just now, that, in a particular instance, it iniglit easily hapjH*n that what is only .second best is l)est practically, l)ccause what is actually l>cst is out of the (juestion. This, I hear you say to yourselves, is the state of things at present. You ivcount in detail the nundjerless impediments, great and small, thi*eatening and vexatielieve, that Education can pos.sibly Ini conducted, here and now, on a the«»logical principle, or that youths of diirerent rtligit>ns can, in matter of fact, Ihj educated aj)art from each other. The more you think over the state of jwditics, the i)osition of parties, the feelings of classes, and the ex|)erience of the past, the more chi- merical tloes it seem to you to aim at anything iK'yond a L'nivei'sity of Mixed Instruction. Nay, even if the attempt could accidentally succeed, would not the mischief exceed the l)enefits of it ? How great the sacrifice, in how many ways, by which it would l>e prece«led and followed ! — how mafiy wounds, ojKn 24 INTRODUCTION. and secret, would it inflict upon the body politic ! And, if it fails, which is to be expected, then a double mischief will ensue from its recognition of evils which it has been unable to remedy. These are your deep mis- givings ; and, in proportion to the force with which they come to you, is the concern and anxiety which they occasion you, that there should be those whom you love, Avhom you revere, who from one cause or other refuse to enter into them. This, I repeat, is what some good Catholics will say to me, and more than this. They will express themselves better than I can speak for them — with more nature and point, with more force of argument and fulness of detail; and I will frankly and at once acknowledge. Gentlemen, that I do not mean here to give a direct answer to their objections. I do not say an ansAver cannot be given; on the Contrary, I may have a confident expectation that, in proportion as those objections are looked in the face, they will fade away. But, however this may be, it would not become me to argue the matter with those who understand the cir- cumstances of the problem so much better than myself. What do I know of the state of things in Ireland that I should presume to put ideas of mine, which could not be right except by accident, by the side of theirs, who speak in the country of their birth and their home? No, Gentlemen, you are natural judges of the difficulties which beset us, and INTODUCTION. 25 they are doubtless greater than 1 can even fancy or forebode. Let me, for the sake of argument, admit all you say against our enterprise, and a great deal more. Your proof of its intrinsic impossibility shall be to me as demonstrative as my own of its theological cor- rectness. Why then should I be so rash and perverse as to involve myself in trouble not properly mine? Why go out of my own place? How is it that I do not know when I am well oflf? Why so headstrong and reckless as to lay up for myself miscarriage and disappointment, as though I had not enough of my own ? Consiilerations such as these might have been simply decisive in time past for the boldest and most able among us ; now, however, I have one resting ])oint, just one, one plea which serves me in the stead of all direct argument whatever, which hardens me against censure, which encourages me against fear, and to which I shall ever come round, when I hear tlie question of the practicable and the expedient brought into discussion. After all, Peter has spoken, i'eter is no recluse, no abstracted student, no dreamer al)out the past, no doter upon the dead and gone, no projector of the visionary. Peter for eighteen hundred years has lived in the world ; he has seen all fortunes, he has encountered all adversaries, he has shaped himself for all emergencies. If there ever was a power on earth who had an eye for the times, who has confined him- self to the practicable, and has been happy in his an- 2() INTRODUCTION. ticipations, whose words have been deeds, and whose eommands prophecies, such is he in the history of ages who sits on from generation to generation in the Chair of the Apostles as the Vicar of Christ and Doctor of His Church. Notions, then, taught me long ago by others, long cherished in my own mind, these are not my confi- dence. Their truth does not make them feasible, nor their reasonableness persuasive. Rather, I would meet the objector by an argument of his own sort. If you tell me this work will fail, I will make answer, the worker is apt to succeed, and I trust in my know- ledge of the past more than in your prediction of the future. It was said by an old philosopher, who de- clined to reply to an emperor's arguments, " It is not safe controverting with the master of twenty legions". What Augustus had in the material order, tliat, and much more, has Peter in the spiritual. Peter has spoken by Pius, and when was Peter ever unequal to the occasion ? When has he not risen with the crisis ? What dangers have ever daunted him ? What sophistry foiled him ? What uncertainties misled him ? When did ever any power go to war with Peter, material or moral, civilized or savage, and got the better ? When did the whole world ever band together against him solitary, and not find him too many for them ? These are not the words of rhetoric, Gentlemen, but of history. All who take part with Peter are on INTRODLCTIOX. 27 the wiimiug side. The Apostle sii} s nut in order to unsiiy, i'or he has inherited that word Avliich is with power. From tlie first he has looked through the wide world, of which he has the burden, and according to the need of the day, and the inspirations of his Lord, he has set himself, now to one thing, now to another, hut to all in season, and to nothing in vain, lie came first upon an age of refinement and luxury like our own, and in s}tite of the persecutor fertile in the resources of his cruelty, he soon gathered, out of all classes of society, the slave, the soldier, tlie high-horn lady, and the sophist, to form a peojile for his Master's honour. The savage hordes came down in torrents from the north, hideous even to look u[>on ; and Peter went out with holy water and with Ix-nison, and hy his very eye he sobered thi-ni and backed them in full career. They turned aside, and Hooded the wht»le earth, but only to be more surely civilized by him, ane made ten times moi-e his children even than the older popu- lations they had overwhelmed. Lawless kings an)se, sagacious as the Roman, passionate as the Hun, yet in him they found their match, and wei-e shat- tered, and he lived on. The gates of the earth were oixiued to the east and west, and men poured out to tiike possession ; and he and his went with them, swept along by zeal and charity as far as they by enterprise, c«)Vetou8ness, or ambition. Has he failed in his suc- cesses up to this hour? Did he, in our fathers' day, 28 INTRODUCTION. fail in his struggle witli Joseph of Germany and his confederates, with Napoleon, a greater name, and his dependent kings, that, though in another kind of fight, he should fail in ours? What grey hairs are on the head of Judah, whose youth is renewed like the eagle's, whose feet are like the feet of harts, and underneath the everlasting Arms? In the first centuries of the Church all this was a mere point of faith, but every age as it has come has stayed up faith by sight ; and shame on us if, with the accumulated witness of eighteen centuries, our eyes are too gross to see what the Saints have ever anticipated. Education, Gentlemen, involved as it is in the very idea of a religion such as ours, cannot be a strange work at any time in the hands of the Vicar of Christ. The heathen forms of religion thought it enough to amuse and quiet the populace with spectacles, and, on the other hand, to bestow a dignity and divine sanction upon the civil ruler; but Catholicism addresses itself directly to the heart and conscience of the individual. The Eeligion which numbers Baptism and Penance among its sacraments, cannot be neglectful of the soul's training; the Creed which opens and re- solves into so majestic and so living a theology, cannot but subserve the cultivation of the intellect; the Re- velation which tells us of truths otherwise utterly hid from us, cannot be justly called the enemy of knowledge; the A\'or.ship. which is so awful and so IXTUODUCTIOX, 20 thrilling, cannot but feed the aspirations of genius, and move the affections from their depths. The Institu- tion, which has flourished in centuries the most famed for mental activity and cultivation, which has come into collision, to say no more, with the schools of Antioch and Alexandria, Athens and Edessa, Sara- cenic Seville, and Protestant Berlin, cannot be want- ing in experience what to do now, and when to do it. He whom the Almighty left behind to Vxi His repre- sentative on earth, has ever been jealous, as beseemed him, as of God's graces, so also of His gifts. He has been as tender of the welfare and interests of human science as he is loyal to the divine truth which is his peculiar charge. He has ever Ixicn the foster-father of secular knowledge, and has rejoiced in its growth, while he has pruned away its self-destructive luxuriance. Least of all can the Catholics of two islands, which have been heretofore so singularly united in the cul- tivation and diffusion of Knowledge, under the auspi- ces of the Apostolic See, we surely. Gentlemen, are not the persons to distrust its wisdom and its fortune when it sends us on a similar mission now. I can- not forget, Gentlemen, that at a time when Celt and Saxon were alike savage, it was the See of Peter that gave both of them first faith, and then civilization ; and then, again, lK)und them together in one by the seal of that joint commission which it gave them to convert and illuminate in turn the pagan Continent. I cannot forget how it was from Rome that the 30 INTRODUCTION. glorious St. Patrick was sent to Ireland, and did a work so great, that lie may be said to have had no suc- cessor in it ; the sanctity, and learning, and zeal, and charity which followed being but the result of the one impulse which he gave. I cannot forget how, in no long time, under the fostering breath of the Vicar of Christ, a country of heathen superstitions became the very wonder and asylum of all people ; — the wonder by reason of its knowledge, sacred and profane ; the asylum for religion, literature, and science, chased away from the Continent by barbaric invaders. I recollect its hospitality freely accorded to the pilgrim ; its volumes munificently presented to the foreign student; and the prayers, and blessings, and holy rites, and solemn chants, which sanctified the while both giver and receiver. Nor can I forget how my own England had meanwhile become the solici- tude of the same unwearied Eye ; how Augustine was sent to us by Gregory ; how he fliinted in the way in terror at our barbarian name, and, but for the Pope, had returned as from an impossible expedition ; how he was forced on " in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling", until he had achieved the conquest of all England to Christ. Nor, how it came to pass that, when Augustine died and his work slackened, another Pope, unwearied still, sent three great Saints from Home to educate and refine the people he had converted. Three holy men set out for England to- gether, of different nations ; Theodore, an Asiatic INTRODUCTION. 31 Greek, from Tarsus ; Adrian, an African ; Bennett alone a Saxon, for Peter knows no distinction of races in his ecumenical work; they came witli theology and science in their train ; with relics, and with pic- tures, and with manuscripts of the Holy Fathers and the Greek classics ; and Theodore and Adrian founded schools, secular and religious, all over England, while Bennett brought to the north the large library he had collected in foreign parts, and, with plans and orna- mental work from France, erected a church of stone, under the invocation of St. Peter, after the Koman fashion, "which", says the historian,* "he most affected". I call to mind how St. Wilfrid, St. John of Beverly, St. Bede, and other saintly men, carried on the goo4i work in the following generations, and how from that time forth the two islamls, England aiitl Ireland, in a dark and dreary age, were the two lights of Christendom ; and nothing passed between them, and no personal aims were theirs, save the inter- change of kind oflBces and the rivalry of love. ! memorable time when St. Aidan and the Irish Monks went up to Lindisfarne and Melrose, and taught the Saxon youth, and a St. CuthlxTt and a St, Eata repaid their gracious toil I ! blessed days of peace and confidence, when Mailduf penetratef things, old in its texture, is ever new in its colouring and fashion. Ireland and England are not what they once were, but Rome is whei-e it was; Peter is the same; his zeal, his charity, his mission, his gifts, are the same. He, of old time, made us one by making us joint teachers of the nations; and now, surely, he is giving us a like mission, and we shall become one again, while we zealously and lovingly fulfil it. DISCOURSE II. THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. Great as are the secular benefits ascribed by the jiliilosopher of the day to the present remarkable reception in so many countries of the theory of Private Judgment, it is not without its political drawbacks, which the statesman at least, whatever ])L' his predilections for Protestantism, cannot in candour refuse to admit. If it has stimulated the activity of the intellect in those nations which have surrendered themselves to its influence, on the other hand it has provided no sufficient safeguards against that activity preying on itself. This inconvenience indeed matters comparatively little to the man of letters, who often has no end in view beyond mental activity itself, of whatever description, and has before now even laid it down, as the nde of his philosophy, that the good of man consists, not in the possession of truth, but in an interminable search after it. But it is other»vise with those who aie engaged in the 36 DISCOURSE 11. business of life, who have work and responsibility, who have measures to carry through and objects to accomplish, who only see what is before them, recog- nize what is tangible, and reverence what succeeds. The statesman especially, who has to win, to attach, to reconcile, to secure, to govern, looks for one thing more than any thing else — how he may do his work with least trouble, how he may best persuade the wheels of the political machine to go smoothly, silently, and steadily; and with this prime deside- ratum nothing interferes so seriously as that indefi- nite multiplication of opinions and wills which it is the boast of Protestantism to have introduced. Amid the overwhelming difficulties of his position, the most Protestant of statesmen will be sorely tempted, in disparagement of his cherished principles, to make a passionate wish, that the people he has to govern, could have, I will not say with the imperial tyrant, one neck, but, what is equally impossible, one private judgment. This embarrassment makes itself especially felt, when he addresses himself to the great question of National Education. He is called upon to provide for the education of the people at large; and that the more urgently, because the religious sentiments, which Private Judgment presupposes and fosters, demand it. The classes and bodies in w^hom political power is lodged, clamour for National Education; he prepares himself to give them satisfaction: but Edu- THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 37 cation of course implies principles and views, and when he proceeds to lay down any whatever, the very same parties who pressed him forward, from their zeal for Education in the abstract, fall out with each other and with him, about every conceivable plan which is proposed to them in a substantive sha^xi. All demand of him, what each in turn forbids; his proceedings are brought to what is familiarly called " a lock"; he can neither advance nor recede; and he loses time and toil in attempting an impossible problem. It would not be wonderful, if, in these trying difficulties, he were to envy the comparative facility of the problem of Education in purely Catholic countries, where certain fundamental principles are felt to be as sure as external facts, and where, in consequence, it is almost as easy to con- struct a national system of teaching, as to raise the school-houses in which it is to be administered. Under these circumstances, he naturally looks about him for methods of eliminating from his problem its intractable conditions, which are wholly or principally religious. He sees then that all would go easy, could he but contrive to educate apart from religion, not compromising indeed his own private religious pei-suasion, whatever it happens to be, but excluding one and all professions of faith from the national system. And thus he is led, by extreme expedience and jwlitical necessity, to sanction the separation of secular instruction frum religious, and 38 DISCOURSE II. to favour the establishment of what are called " Mixed Scliools". Such a procedure, I say, on the part of a statesman, is but a natural effort, under the circumstances of his day, to appropriate to him- self a privilege, without the Church's aid, which the Church alone can bestow; and he becomes what is called a Liberal, as the very nearest approach he can make, in a Protestant country, to being a Catholic. Since his schools cannot have one faith, he deter- mines, as the best choice left to him, that they shall have none. Nothing surely is more intelligible than conduct like this; and the more earnest is his patriotism, the warmer his philanthropy, the more of statesmanship, the more of administrative talent he possesses, the more cordially will he adopt it. And hence it is that at the present day, when so much benevolence and practical wisdom are to be found among public men, there is a growing movement in favour of Mixed Education, whether as regards the higher or the lower classes, on the simple ground, that nothing else remains to be done. So far, I sav, is intelli- gible; but there are higher aspects of the question than that of political utility. My business is, not with the mere statesman, but with those who profess to regulate their public conduct by principle and logic. I want to see into what principles such a policy resolves itself, when submitted to a philoso- phical analysis, for then we shall be better able to THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KXOAVLEDGE. 39 Uetermine what should be a Catholic's judgment u^wn it. Now, on entering upon my subject, first of all I put aside the question of the mixed education of the lower classes, being concerned only with University Education. Having done this, I am able to bring the question to this simple issue. A University, as the name implies, is the seat of universal knowledge ; it follows then at once to ask, whether this definition of a University, which can hardly be gainsaid, is compatible with the political expedient which I have been describing: whether it is philosophical or pos- sible to profess all branches of knowledge, yet to exclude one, and that one not the lowest in the series. But this, of course, is to assume that Theology is a science, and an important one: so I will express myself in a more general form. I say, then, that if a University be, from the nature of the case, a place of instruction, where universal knowledge is pro- fessed, and if in a certain University, so called, the subject of Religion is excluded, one of two conclusions is inevitable, — either, on the one hand, that the province of Religion is very barren of real knowledge, or, on the other, that in such University one special and important branch of knowledge is omitted. I say, the advocate of such an institution must say this, or must say that; he must own, either that little or nothing is known about the Supreme Being, or 40 DISCOURSE II. that his seat of learning calls itself what it is not. This is the thesis which I lay down, and on which I shall insist in the Discourse which is to follow. I re- peat, such a compromise between religious parties, as is involved in the establishment of a University which makes no religious profession, implies that those parties severally consider, not indeed that their own respective opinions are trifles in a moral and practical point of view — of course not; but certainly as much as this, that they are not knowledge. Did they in their hearts believe that their private views of reli- gion, whatever they are, were absolutely and objec- tively true, it is inconceivable that they would so insult them as to consent to their omission in an institution which is bound, from the nature of the case — from its very idea and its name — to make a profession of all sorts of knowledge whatever. I think this will be found to be no matter of words. I allow then fully, that, when men combine together for any common object, they are obliged, as a matter of course, in order to secure the advantages accruing from united action, to sacrifice many of their private opinions and wishes, and to drop the minor differences, as they are commonly called, which exist between man and man. No two persons perhaps are to be found, however intimate, however congenial in tastes and judgments, however eager to have one heart and one soul, but must deny them- selves, for the sake of each other, much which they THEOLOGY A BRxVNCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 41 like or desire, if they are to live together happily. Compromise, in a large sense of the word, is the first principle of combination; and any one who insists on enjoying his rights to the full, and his opinions without exception, and his own way in all things, will soon have all things altogether to himself, and no one to share them with him. But most true as this confessedly is, still there is an obvious limit, on the other hand, to these compromises, necessary as they are; and this is found in the proviso^ that the differences surrendered should be hut "minor", or that there should be no sacrifice of the main object in view, in the concessions which are mutually made. Any sacrifice which implicates that object is destruc- tive of the principle of the combination, and no one who would be consistent, can be a party to it. Thus, for instance, if men of various religious denominations join together for the dissemination of Avhat are called " evangelical" tracts, it is under the belief, that the object of their uniting, recognized on all hands, being the spiritual benefit of their neigh- bours, no religious exhortation, whatever be its cha- racter, can essentially interfere with that benefit, which is founded upon the Lutheran doctrine of Justification^ If, again, they agree together in printing and circulating the Protestant Bible, it is because they, one and all, hold to the principle, that, however serious be their differences of religious sen- timent, such differences ftide away before the one 42 DISCOURSE II. great principle, which that circulation symbolizes — that the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, is the religion of Protestants. On the con- trary, if the committee of some such association inserted tracts into the copies of the said Bible which they sold, and tracts in recommendation of the Atha- nasian Creed or the merit of good works, I conceive any subscribing member would have a just right to complain of a proceeding, which compromised both the principle of Private Judgment, and the doctrine of Justification by faith only. These instances are sufficient to illustrate my general position, that coali- tions and comprehensions for an object, have their life in the prosecution of that object, and cease to have any meaning as soon as that object is compro- mised or disparaged. When, then, a number of persons come forward, not as politicians, not as diplomatists, lawyers, tra- ders, or speculators, but with the one object of advancing Universal Knowledge, much we may allow them to sacrifice; ambition, reputation, leisure, com- fort, gold; one thing they may not sacrifice — Know- ledge itself. Knowledge being their object, they need not of course insist on their own private views about ancient or modern history, or national prosperity, or the balance of power; they need not of course shrink from the cooperation of those who hold the opposite views, but stipulate they must that Knowledge itself is not compromised; and those views, of whatever TUEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 43 kind, Avhicli they do allow to be dropped, it is plain they consider to be opinions, and nothing more, how- ever dear, however important to themselves personally ; opinions ingenious, admirable, pleasurable, beneficial, expedient, but not worthy the name of Knowledge or Science. Thus no one would insist on the Mal- thusian theory being a sine qud non in a seat of learning, who did not think it simply ignorance not to be a Malthusian; and no one would consent to drop the Newtonian theory, who thought it to be proved true, in the same sense as the existence of the sun and moon is true. If, then, in an Institution which professes all knowledge, nothing is professed, nothing is taught about the Supreme Being, it is fair to infer that every individual of all those who advo- cate that Institution, supposing him consistent, dis- tinctly holds that nothing is known for certain about the Supreme Being; nothing such as to have any claim to be regarded as an accession to the stock of general knowledge existing in the world. If on the other hand it turns out that something considerable is known about the Supreme Being, whether from Reason or Eevelation, then the Institution in ques- tion professes every science, and leaves out the fore- most of them. In a word, strong as may appear the assertion, I do not see how I can avoid making it, and bear with me, Gentlemen, while I do so, viz. : such an Institution cannot be what it professes, if there be a God. I do not wish to declaim; but, by 44 DISCOURSE IT. the very force of the terms, it is very plain, that God and such a University cannot coexist. Still, however, this may seem to many an abrupt conclusion, and will not be acquiesced in: what answer, Gentlemen, will be made to it? Perhaps this: — It will be said, that there are different kinds or spheres of Knowledge, human, divine, sensible, intellectual, and the like; and that a University certainly takes in all varieties of Knowledge in its own line, but still that it has a line of its own. It contemplates, it occupies a certain order, a certain platform of Knowledge. I understand the remark; but I own to you, Gentlemen, I do not understand how it can be made to apply to the matter in hand. I cannot so construct my definition of the subject matter of University Knowledge, and so draw my boundary lines around it, to include therein the other sciences commonly studied at Universities, and to exclude the science of Religion. Are we to limit our idea of University Knowledge by the evidence of our senses? then we exclude history; by testimony? we exclude metaphysics; by abstract reasoning? we ex- clude physics. Is not the being of a God reported to us by testimony, handed down by history, inferred by an inductive process, brought home to us by metaphysical necessity, urged on us by the sugges- tions of our conscience? It is a truth in the natural order, as well as in the supernatural. So much for its origin; and, when obtained, what is it worth? Is THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 45 it a great truth or a small one? Is it a compreheiisiA^e truth? Say that no other religious idea whatever were given but it, and you have enough to fill the mind ; you have at once a whole dogmatic system. The word "God" is a theology in itself, indivisibly one, inex- haustibly various, from the vastness and the simplicity of its meaning. Admit a God, and you introduce among the subjects of your knowledge, a fact encompassing, closing in upon, absorbing, every other fact conceiv- able. IIow can we investigate any part of any order of Knowledge, and stop short of that which enters into every order? All true principles run over with it, all phenomena run into it; it is truly the First and tlie Last. In word indeed, and in idea, it is easy enough to divide Knowledge into human and divine, secular and religious, and to lay down that we will address ourselves to the one without interfering with the other; but it is impossible in fact. Granting that divine truth differs in kind from human, so do human truths differ in kind one from another. If the knowledge of the Creator is in a different order from knowledge of the creature, so, in like manner, metaphysical science is in a different order from physical, physics from history, history from ethics. You will soon break up into fragments the whole circle of secular knowledge, if you begin the mutila- tion with divine. I have been speaking simply of Natiu-al Theology; my argument of course is stronger when I go on to 46 DISCOURSE II. Revelation. Let the doctrine of the Incarnation be true; is it not at once of the nature of an historical fact, and of a metaphysical? Let it be true that there are Angels: how is this not a point of knowledge in the same sense as the naturalist's asseveration, that there are myriads of living things on the point of a needle? That the Earth is to be burned by fire, is, if true, as large a fact as that huge monsters once played amid its depths; that Antichrist is to come, is as categorical a heading to a chapter of history, as that Nero or Julian was Emperor of Rome; that a divine influence moves the will, is a subject of thought not more mysterious than the effect of voli- tion on the animal frame. I do not see how it is possible for a philosophical mind, first, to believe these religious facts to be true; next, to consent to put them aside; and thirdly, in spite of this, to go on to profess to be teaching all the while de omni scihili. No; if a man thinks in his heart that these religious facts are short of truth, are not true in the sense in which the motion of the Earth is true, I understand his excluding Religion from his University, though he professes other reasons for its exclusion. In that case the varieties of religious opinions under which he shelters his conduct, are not only his apology for publicly ignoring religion, but a cause of his privately disbelieving it. He does not think that any thing is known or can be known for cer- tain, about the origin of the world or the end of man. THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 47 This, I fear, is the conclusion to which intellects, clear, logical, and consistent, have come, or are » coming, from the nature of the case; and, alas! in addition to this prima facie suspicion, there are actual tendencies in the same direction in Protes- tantism, viewed whether in its original idea, or again in the so-called Evangelical movement in these islands during the last century. The religious world, as it is styled, holds, generally speaking, that religion consists, not in knowledge, but in feeling or sentiment. The old Catholic notion, which still lin- gers in the Established Church, was, that Faith was an intellectual act, its object truth, and its result knowledge. Thus if you look into the Anglican Prayer Book, you will find definite credenda^ as well as definite agenda; but in proportion as the Lutheran leaven spread, it became fashionable to say that Faith was but a feeling, an emotion, an affection, an ap- petency, not an act of the intellect; and as this view of Faith obtained, so was its connexion with Truth and Knowledge more and more either forgotten or denied. The Prayer Book, indeed, contained the Creed, among other memorials of antiquity; but a question began to be agitated whether its recital was any thing better than the confession of a dead faith, the faith of devils, formal, technical, soul-deceiving, not the guarantee at all of what was deemed to be spi- ritual renovation. It was objected too, that whereas there was just one doctrine which was adapted 48 DISCOURSE II. to move the feelings, open the heart, and change corrupt nature, viz. — the Atonement, that doctrine was not to be found there. Then again, spiritual- mindedness and heavenly -mindedness consisted, according to the school in question, not, as a Catholic would say, in a straightforward acceptance of re- vealed truth, and an acting upon it, but in a dreamy and sickly state of soul; in an effort after religious conversation; in a facility of detailing what men called experiences; nay, I will add, in a constrained gravity of demeanour, and an unnatural tone of voice. Now many men laughed at all this, many men admired it; but whether they admired or laughed, both the one party and the other found themselves in agreement on the main point, viz. — in considering that this really was in substance Eeligion; that Reli- gion was based, not on argument, but on taste and sentiment, that nothing was objective, every thing- subjective, in doctrine. I say, even those who saw through the affectation in which the religious school of which I am speaking clad itself, still came to think that Religion, as such, consisted in something short of intellectual exercises, viz., in the affections, in tlie imagination, in inward persuasions and consolations, in pleasurable sensations, sudden changes, and sub. lime fancies. They learned to say, that Religion was nothing beyond a supply of the wants of human nature, not an external fact and a work of God. There was, it appeared, a demand for Religion, and THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 49 therefore there was a supply; human nature could not do without Religion, any more than it could do without bread; a supply was absolutely necessary, good or bad, and, as in the case of the articles of daily sustenance, an article which was really inferior was better than none at all. Thus Religion was useful, venerable, beautiful, the sanction of order, the stay of government, the curb of self-will and self-indulgence, which the laws cannot reach: but, after all, on what was it based? Why, that was a question delicate to ask, and imprudent to answer; but, if the truth must be spoken, however reluc- tantly, the long and the short of the matter was this, that Religion was based on custom, on prejudice, on law, on education, on habit, on loyalty, on feudalism, on enlightened expedience, on many, many things, but not at all on Reason; Reason was not in the num- ber, ilt is true, Rational Religion is spoken of in the circles in question; but, when you carefully consider the matter, you will find this does not mean a kind of Religion which is built upon Reason, but merely a Religion which does not interfere with Reason, which does not clash with what are consi- dered rational ideas, with rational pursuits, rational enjoyment of life, and rational views of the next world. You see, Gentlemen, how a theory or philosophy, which began with Luther, the Puritans, and Wesley, has been taken up by that large and influential body 50 DISCOURSE II. which goes by the name of Liberal or Latitudinarian; and how, where it prevails, it is as unreasonable of course to demand for Religion a chair in a Univer- sity, as to demand one for fine feeling, sense of honour, patriotism, gratitude, maternal aflfection, or good companionship, proposals which would be sim- ply unmeaning. Now, in support of what I have been saying, I will appeal, in the first place, to a statesman, but not merely so, to no mere politician, no trader in places, or votes, or the stock market, but to a philosopher, to an orator, to one whose profession, whose aim has ever been to cultivate the fair, the noble, and the generous. I cannot forget the celebrated discourse of the celebrated man to whom I am alluding; a man who is first in his peculiar walk; whose talents have earned for him nobility at home, and a jnore than European name; and who, moreover (which is much to my purpose), has had a share, as much as any one alive, in effecting the public recog- nition in these Islands of the principle of Mixed Education. This able person, during the years in which he was exerting himself in its behalf, made a speech or discourse, on occasion of a public solemnity ; and in reference to the bearing of general knowledge upon religious belief, he spoke as fol- lows: " As men", he said, " will no longer suffer them- selves to be led blindfold in ignorance, so will they THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 51 no more yield to the vile principle of judging and treating their fellow-creatures, not according to the intrinsic merit of their actions, but according to the accidental and involuntary coincidence of their opi- nions. The Great Truth has finally gone forth to all the ends of the earth", and he prints it in capital letters, " that man shall no more render account to man for his belief, over which he has himself no control. Henceforward, nothing shall prevail upon us to praise or to blame any one for that which he can no more change, than he can the hue of his skin or the height of his stature".* You see, Gentlemen, if this philosopher is to decide the matter, religious ideas are just as far from being real, or representing an external object, are as truly imaginations, idiosyn- cracies, accidents of the individual, as his having the stature of a Patagonian, or the features of a Negro. But perhaps this was the rhetoric of an excited moment. Far from it. Gentlemen, or I should not have fastened on the words of a fertile mind, uttered so long ago. What Mr. Brougham laid down as a principle in 1825, resounds on all sides of us, with ever growing confidence and success, in 1852. I open the Minutes of the Committoe of Council on Education for the years 1848-50, presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of her Majesty, * Mr. Brougham's Glasgow Discourse. 4 52 DISCOURSE II. and I find one of her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools, at p. 467 of the second volume, dividing "the topics usually embraced in the better class of primary schools " into four: — the knowledge of signs ^ as reading and writing; of facts ^ as geography and astronomy; of relations and laws, as mathematics; and lastly sentiment, such as poetry and music. Now, on first catching this division, it occurred to me to ask myself, before ascertaining the writer's own resolution of the matter, under which of these four heads fell Religion, or whether it fell under any of them. Did he put it aside as a thing too delicate and sacred to be enumerated with earthly studies? or did he distinctly contemplate it when he made his division? Any how, I could really find a place for it under the first head, or the second, or the third; for it has to do with facts, since it tells of the Self-subsisting; it has to do with relations, for it tells of the Creator; it has to do with signs, for it tells of the due manner of speaking of Him. There was just one head of the division to which I could not refer it, viz., to senti- ment; for, I suppose, music and poetry, which are the writer's own examples of sentiment, have not much to do with Truth, which is the sole object of Religion. Judge then my surprise, Gentlemen, when 1 found the fourth was the very head selected by the writer of the Report in question, as the special receptacle of religious topics. " The inculcation of sentimenf\ he says, " embraces reading in its higher sense, poetry, THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 53 music, together with moral and religious education". What can be clearer than that, in this writer's idea (whom I am far from introducing for his own sake, because I have no wish to hurt the feelings of a gentleman, who is but exerting himself zealously in the discharge of anxious duties; I do but intro- duce him as an illustration of the wide-spreading school of thought to which he belongs) ; what, I say, can more clearly prove than a candid avowal like this, that, in the view of that school, Religion is not knowledge, has nothing whatever to do with know- ledge, and is excluded from a University course of in- struction, not simply because the exclusion cannot be helped, from political or social obstacles, but be- cause it has no business there at all, because it is to be considered a mere taste, sentiment, opinion, and nothing more? The writer avows this conclusion himself, in the explanation into which he presently enters, in which he says: "According to the classifi- cation proposed, the essential idea of all religious education will consist in the direct cultivation of the feelings''. Here is Lutheranism sublimated into phi- losophy; what we contemplate, what we aim at, when we give a religious education, is, not to impart any knowledge whatever, but to satisfy anyhow, desires which will arise after the Unseen in spite of us, to pro- vide the mind with a means of self-command, to impress on it the beautiful ideas which saints and sages have struck out, to embellish it with the bright hues of a 54 DISCOURSE II. celestial piety, to teach it the poetry of devotion, the music of well-ordered affections, and the luxury of doing good. The soul comes forth from her bower, for the adoration of the lecture-room and the saloon; like the first woman, in the poet's description, " Grace is in all her steps, heaven in her eye, In every gesture dignity and love". As for the intellect, on the other hand, its exercise is only indirect in religious education, as being an instrument in a moral work (true or false, it matters little, or rather anything must be true, which is capable of reaching the end proposed) ; or again, as the unavoidable attendant on moral impressions, from the constitution of the human mind, but varying with the peculiarities of the individual.* Something *"In the diverse schools", he says, "amongst which my labours are carried on, there are some, in which the Bible is the sole basis of religious instruction ; and there are others, in which catechisms, or other abstracts of doctrine, are employed. As far as my own ob- servation extends, it has ever appeared perfectly indifferent, as to the results, what precise method or instrumentality may be adopted. I have seen the happiest, and I have seen the most unsatisfactory I'esults, aUke under both systems. In each case, the mere instru- ment of teaching is of small importance compared with the sphit which is infused into it by the teacher. The danger in each case is, that of employing the instrument simply as the basis of an intellectual exercise, and losing sight of the moral and religious sentiment it is intended to draw forth". THEOLOGY A BKANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 55 like this seems to be the writer's meaning, but we need not pry into its finer issues in order to guin a distinct view of its general bearing; and taking it, as I think we fairly may take it, as a specimen of the philosophy of the day, as adopted by those who are not conscious unbelievers, or open scoffers, I con- sider it amply explains how it comes to pass that the day's philosophy sets up a system of universal know- ledge, and teaches of plants, and earths, and creeping things, and beasts, and gases, about the crust of the Earth, and the changes of the atmosphere, about sun, moon, and stars, about man and his doings, about the history of the world, about sensation, memory, and the passions, about duty, about cause and effect, about all things imaginable, except one — and that is, about Him that made all these things, about God. I say the reason is plain, because they consider knowledge, as regards the creature, is illimitable, but impossible or hopeless as regards the Crea- tor. Here, however, it may be objected to me that this representation is certainly extreme, for the school in question does, in fact, lay great stress on the evidence afforded by the creation, to the Being and Attributes of the Creator. I may be referred, for instance, to the words of one of the speakers, at the solem- nities which took place, at the time when the principle of Mixed Education was first formally inaugurated in the metropolis of the sister island. On the occasion 5Q DISCOURSE II. of laying the first stone of the University of London, I confess it, a learned person, since elevated to the Protestant See of Durham, which he still fills, opened the proceedings with prayer. He addressed the Deity, as the authoritative Report informs us, " the whole surrounding assembly standing uncovered in solemn silence". " Thou", he said, m the name of all the denominations present, " thou hast constructed the vast fabric of the universe in so wonderful a manner, so arranged its motions, and so formed its productions, that the contemplation and study of thy works exercise at once the mind in the pursuit of human science, and lead it onwards to Divine Truth"", Here is apparently a distinct recognition that there is such a thing as Truth in the province of Religion; and, did the passage stand by itself, and were it the only means we possessed of ascertaining the senti- ments, not of this divine himself (for I am not con- cerned with him personally), but of the powerful body whom he there represented, it would, as far as it goes, be satisfactory. I admit it; and I admit also the recognition of the Being and certain Attributes of the Deity, contained in the writings of the noble and gifted person whom I have already quoted, whose genius, versatile and multiform as it is, in nothing has been so constant, as in its devotion to the advancement of knowledge, scientific and lite- rary. He then, in his " Discourse of the objects, advantages, and pleasures of science", after variously THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 57 illustrating what he terms its " gratifying treats", crowns the catalogue with "the highest of all our gratifications in the contemplation of science", which he proceeds to explain thus: " We are raised by them", he says, "to an under- standing of the infinite wisdom and goodness which the Creator has displayed in all His works. Not a step can be taken in any direction", he continues, " without perceiving the most extraordinary traces of design; and the skill, every where conspicuous, is calculated in so vast a proportion of instances to promote the happiness of living creatures, and espe- cially of ourselves, that we can feel no hesitation in concluding, that, if we knew the whole scheme of Providence, every part would be in harmony with a plan of absolute benevolence. Independent, how- ever, of this most consoling inference, the delight is inexpressible, of being able to follow, as it were, with our eyes, the marvellous works of the Great Architect of Nature, to trace the unbounded power and exquisite skill which are exhibited in the most minute, as well as the mightiest parts of His system. The pleasure derived from this study is unceasing, and so various, that it never tires the appetite. But it is unlike the low gratifications of sense in another respect: it elevates and refines our nature, while those hurt the healtli, debase the understanding, and corrupt the feelings; it teaches us to look upon all earthly objects as insignificant 58 DISCOURSE II. and below our notice, except the pursuit of knowledge and the cultivation of virtue, that is to say, the strict performance of our duty in every relation of society; and it gives a dignity and importance to the enjoy- ment of life, which the frivolous and the grovelling cannot even comprehend". Such are the words of this prominent champion of Mixed Education. If logical inference he, as it un- doubtedly is, an instrument of truth, surely, it may be answered to me, in admitting the possibility of in- ferring the Divine Being and Attributes from the phenomena of nature, he distinctly admits a basis of truth in the doctrines of Religion. I wish. Gentlemen, to give these representations their full weight, both from the gravity of the ques- tion, and the consideration due to the persons whom I am arraigning; but, before I can feel sure I under- stand them, I must ask an abrupt question. When I am told, then, by the partizans of Mixed Educa- tion, that human science leads to belief in a Supreme Being, without denying, nay, as a Catholic, with full conviction of the fact, — yet I am obliged to ask what the statement means in their mouth, what they, the speakers, understand by the word " God". Let me not be thought offensive, if I question, whe- tlier it means the same thing on the two sides of the controversy. With us Catholics, as with the first race of Protestants, as with Mahometans, and all Theists, the word contains, as I have already said, a TUEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 59 theology in itself. At the risk of anticipating what I shall have occasion to insist upon in my next Dis- course, let me say that, according to the teaching of Monotheism, God is an Individual, Self-dependent, All-perfect, Unchangeable Being; intelligent, living, personal, and present; almighty, all -seeing, all -re- membering; between whom and His creatures there is an infinite gulf; who had no origin, who passed an eternity by Himself; who created and upholds the universe; who will judge every one of us, at the end of time, according to that Law of right and wrong which He has written on our hearts. He is one who is sovereign over, operative amidst, independent of, the appointments which He has made; one in whose hands are all things, who has a purpose in every event, and a standard for every deed, and thus has relations of His own towards the subject matter of each particular science which the book of knowledge unfolds; who has with an adorable, never-ceasing energy mixed Himself up with all the history of creation, the constitution of nature, the course of the world, the origin of society, the fortunes of nations, the action of the human mind; and who thereby necessarily becomes the subject matter of a science, far wider and more noble than anv of those which are included in the circle of secular education. This is the doctrine which belief in a God implies: if it means any thing, it means all this, and cannot keep from mi-aiiiiig all this, and a great deal more; 60 DISCOURSE II. and, though there were nothing in Protestantism, as such, to disparage dogmatic truth (and I have shown there is a great deal), still, even then, I should have difficulty in believing that a doctrine so myste- rious, so peremptory, approved itself as a matter of course to educated men of this day, who gave their minds attentively to consider it. Eather, in a state of society such as ours, in which authority, prescription, tradition, habit, moral instinct, and the influences of grace go for nothing, in which patience of thought, and depth and consistency of view, are scorned as subtle and scholastic, in which free discussion and fallible judgment are prized as the birthright of each individual, I must be excused if I exercise towards this age, as regards its belief in this doctrine, some portion of that scepticism which it exercises itself towards every received but unscrutinized assertion whatever. I cannot take it for granted, I must have it brought home to me by tangible evidence, that the spirit of the age means by the Supreme Being what Catholics mean. Nay, it would be a relief to my mind to gain some ground of assurance, that the parties influenced by that spirit had, I will not say, a true apprehension of God, but even so much as the idea of what a true apprehension is. Nothing is easier than to use the word, and mean nothing by it. The heathens used to say, "God wills", when they meant " Fate"; " God provides", when they meant "Chance"; "God acts", when they THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. Gl meant "Instinct" or "Sense'; and "God is every where", when they meant "the Soul of Nature". The Almighty is something infinitely different from a principle, or a centre of action, or a quality, or a generalization of phenomena. If then, by the word, you do but mean a Being who has contrived the world and keeps it in order, who acts in it, but only in the way of general Providence, who acts towards us but only through, what are called, laws of Nature, who is more certain not to act at all, than to act in- dependent of those laws, who is known and approached indeed, but only through the medium of tliose laws; such a God it is not difiicult for anyone to conceive, not difficult for any one to endure. If, I say, as you would revolutionize society, so you would revolutionize hea- ven, if you have changed the divine sovereignty into a sort of constitutional monarchy, in which the Throne has honour and ceremonial enough, but cannot issue the most ordinary command except through legal forms and precedents, and with the counter-signature of a minister, then belief in a God is no more than an acknowledgment of existing, sensible powers and phenomena, which none but an idiot can deny. If the Supreme Being is powerful or skilful, just so far forth as the telescope shows power, and the micro- scope shows skill, if His moral law is to be ascer- tained simply by the physical processes of the animal frame, or His will gathered from the immediate issues of human affairs, if His Essence is just as higli 62 DISCOURSE II. and deep and broad and long, as the universe, and no more; if this be the fact, then will I confess that there is no specific science about God, that theology is but a name, and a protest in its behalf an hypo- crisy. Then, is He but coincident with the laws of the universe; then is He but a function, or correla- tive, or subjective reflection and mental impression of each phenomenon of the material or moral world, as it flits before us. Then, pious as it is to think of Him, while the pageant of experiment or abstract reasoning passes by, still such piety is nothing more than a poetry of thought or an ornament of lan- guage, and has not even an infinitesimal influence upon philosophy or science, of which it is rather the parasitical production. I understand, in that case, why Theology should require no specific teaching, for there is nothing to mistake about; why it is power- less against scientific conclusions, for it merely is one of them; why it is simply absurd in its denunciations of heresy, for it does but lie itself in the province of opinion. I understand, in that case, how it is that the religious sense is but a " sentiment", and its exercise a " gratifying treat", for it is like the sense of the beautiful or the sublime. I understand how the contemplation of the universe " leads onwards to divine truth", for divine truth is but Nature with a divine glow upon it. I understand the zeal ex- pressed for Natural Theology, for this study is but a mode of looking at Nature, a certain view taken of THEOLOGY A BRANCn OF KNOWLEDGE. G3 Nature, private and personal, which one man has, and another has not, which gifted minds strike out, which others see to be admirable and ingenious, and which all would be the better for adopting. It is the theology of Nature, just as we talk of the phi- losophy or the romance of history, or the poetry of childhood, or the picturesque, or the sentimental, or the humourous, or any other abstract quality, which the genius or the caprice of the individual, or the fashion of the day, or the consent of the w^orld, re- cognizes in any set of objects which are subjected to its contemplation. Such ideas of Religion seem to me short of Mono- theism; I do not impute them to this or that indi- vidual who belongs to the school which gives them currency; but what I read about the "gratification" of keeping pace in our scientific researches with " the Architect of Nature"; about the said gratification "giving a dignity and importance to the enjoyment of life", and teaching us that knowledge and our duties to society are the only earthly subject worth our notice, all this, I own it. Gentlemen, frightens me; nor is Dr. Maltby's address to the Deity amid "solemn silence", sufficient to reassure me. I do not see much difference between saying that there is no God, and implying that nothing definite can for certain be known about Him ; and when I find Religious Educa- tion treated as the cultivation of sentiment, and Religious Belief as the accidental hue or posture of 64 DISCOURSE II. the mind, I am reluctantly but forcibly reminded of a very unpleasant page of Metaphysics, of the relations between God and Nature insinuated by such philoso- phers as Hume. This acute though most low-minded of speculators, in his inquiry concerning the Human Understanding, introduces, as is well known, Epicu- rus, that is, a teacher of atheism, delivering an harangue to the Athenian people, not in defence, but in extenuation of that opinion. His object is to show that, whereas the atheistic view is nothing else than the repudiation of theory, and an accurate represen- tation of phenomenon and fact, it cannot be dangerous, unless phenomenon and fact be dangerous. Epicurus is made to say, that the paralogism of philo- sophy has ever been the arguing from Nature in behalf of something beyond Nature, greater than Nature; whereas God, as he maintains, being known only through the visible world, our knowledge of Him is absolutely commensurate with our knowledge of it, is nothing distinct from it, is but a mode of viewing it. Hence it follows that, provided we admit, as we cannot help doing, the phenomena of Nature and the world, it is only a question of words whether or not we go on to the hypothesis of a second Being, not visible but immaterial, parallel and coincident with Nature, to whom we give the name of God. "Allow- ing", he says, " the gods to be the authors of the ex- istence or order of the universe, it follows that they possess that precise degree of power, intelligence, and THEOLOGY A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE. 65 benevolence, which appears in their workmanship; but nothing fiirther can be proved, except we call in the assistance of exaggeration and flattery to supply the defects of argument and reasoning. So for as the traces of any attributes, at present, appear, so far may we conclude these attributes to exist. The sup- position of farther attributes is mere hypothesis ; much more the supposition, that, in distant periods of place and time, there has been, or will be, a more magnificentdisplay of these attributes, and a scheme of administration more suitable to such imaginary virtues". Here is a reasoner, who would not hesitate to deny that there is any distinct science or philosophy possible concerning the Supreme Being; since every single thing we know of Him is this or that or the other phenomenon, material or moral, which already falls under this or that natural science. In him then it would be only consistent to drop Theo- logy in a course of University Education; but how is it consistent in any one who shrinks from his companionship ? I am glad to see that the author, several times mentioned, is in opposition to Hume, in one sentence of the quotation I have made from his Discourse upon Science, de- ciding, as he does, that the phenomena of the material world are insufficient for the full exhibition of the Divine Attributes, and implying that they re- quire a supplemental process to complete and GG DISCOURSE II. harmonize their evidence. But is not this supple- mental process a science? and if so, why not ac- knowledge its existence? If God is more than Nature, Theology claims a place among the sciences: but, on the other hand, if you are not sure of this, how do you differ from Hume or Epicurus? I end then as I began: religious doctrine is Know- ledge. This is the important truth, little entered into at this day, which I Avisli that all who have honoured me with their presence here, would allow me to beg them to take away with them. I am not catching at sharp arguments, but laying down grave principles. Religious doctrine is knowledge, in as full a sense as Newton's doctrine is knowledge. Mixed Education, at least in a University, is simply unphilosophical. Theology has at least as good a right to claim a place there as astronomy. In my next Discourse it will be my object to show, that its omission from the list of recognized sciences, is not only indefensible in itself, but prejudicial to all the rest. DISCOURSE III. BEAUINO or THEOLOGY rinciple of a division ot" labour, even tliy the conclusions of the astronomer and the geologist, and its casuistical de- cisions by the various experience, political, social, and psychological, witli which times and places are ever supplying it. Wliat Theology gives, it has a right to take ; or rather, the interests of Truth oldige it to take. It we wouhl not be beguiled l)y dreams, if we wouhl ascertain facts as they are, then, granting Theology is a real science, we cannot exclude it, and still call ourselves philosophers. I have asserted nothing as yet as to the preeminent dignity of Keligious Truth ; 1 only say, if there be Religious Truth at all, we can- not shut our eyes to it, without prejudice to truth of 80 DISCOURSE III. every kind, physical, metaphysical, historical, and moral ; for it bears upon all truth. And thus I an- swer the objection with which I opened this Discourse. I supposed the question put to me by a philosopher of the day, " Why cannot you go your way, and let us go ours ?" I answer, in the name of Theology, "When Newton can dispense with the metaphysician, then may you dispense with us". So much at first sight ; now I am going on to claim a little more for Theology, by classing it with branches of knowledge which may with greater decency be compared to it. Let us see then, how this supercilious treatment of so momentous a science, for momentous it must be, if there be a God, runs in a somewhat parallel case. The great philosopher of antiquity, when he would enumerate the causes of the things that take place in the world, after making mention of those which he considered to be physical and material, adds, " and the mind and everthing which is by means of man''.* Certainly ; it would have been a preposterous course, when he would trace the effects he saw around him to their respective sources, had he directed his ex- clusive attention upon some one class or order of originating principles, and ascribed to these every thing which happened any where. It would indeed have been unworthy a genius so curious, so pene- trating, so fertile, so analytical as Aristotle's, to have Arist. Ethic. Nicom,, iii. 3. BEARING OF THEOLOGY 0\ OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 81 laid it down thiit every thing on the face of the earth could be accounted for by the material sciences, without the hypothesis of moral agents. It is in- credible that in the investigation of physical results he could ignore so intluential a being as man, or forget that, not only brute force and elemental movement, but knowledge also is power. And this, so much the more, inasmuch as moral and spiritual agents belong to another, not to say a higher, order than physical ; so that the omission supposed would not have been merely an oversight in matters of detail, but a philosophical error, and a fault in division. However, we live in an ago of the world, wiien the career of science and literature is little affected by what was done, or would have been done, by this venerable authority ; so, we will suppose, in England or Ireland, in the middle of the nineteenth century, a set of persons of name and celebrity to meet together, in spite of Aristotle, and to adopt a line of proceeding, wliich they conceive the circumstances of the time render imi)erative. We will suppose that a difficulty just now besets the enunciation and discussion of all matters of science, in consequence of the extreme sensitiveness of large classes of the community, ministers and laymen, on the subjects of necessity, responsibility, the standard of morals, and the nature of virtue. Parties run so high, that the only way of avoiding constant quarrelling in defence of this or 82 DISCOURSE iir. that side of the question, is, in tlio judgment of the persons I am supposing, to sliut up tlie suhject of anthropology altogether. The Privy Council issues an order to that effect. Man is to he as if he were not, in the general course of Education; the moral and mental sciences are to have no professorial chairs, and the treatment of them is to be simply as a matter of private judgment, which each individual may carry out as he will. I can just fancy such a prohibition abstractedly possible ; but one thing I cannot fancy possible, viz., that the parties in question, after this sweeping act of exclusion, should forthwith send out proposals on the basis of such exclusion, for publish- ing an Encyclopedia, or erecting a National University. It is necessary, however. Gentlemen, for the sake of the illustration which I am setting before you, to imagine what cannot be. I say, let us imagine a project for organizing a system of scientific teaching, in which the agency of man in the material world, cannot allowably be recognized, and may allowably be denied. Physical and mechanical causes are ex- clusively to be treated of; volition is a forloidden subject. A Prospectus is put out, with a list of sciences, we will say. Astronomy, Optics, Hydro- statics, Galvanism, Pneumatics, Statics, Dynamics, Pure Mathematics, Geology, Botany, Physiology, Anatomy, and so forth ; but not a word about the mind and its powers, except wliat is said in explana- tion of the omission. That explanation is to the BEAUING OF THEOLOGY OX OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 83 effect, that the parties concerned in the undertaking have given long and painful thought to the subject, and have been reluctantly driven to the conclusion, that it is simply impracticable to include in the list of University Lectures the Philosophy of Mind. What relieves, however, their regret is the reflection, that domestic feelings and polished manners are best cul- tivated in the family circle and in good society, in the observance of the sacred ties which unite father, mother, and child, in the correlative claims and duties of citizenship, in the exercise of disinterested loyalty and enlightened patriotism. With this apology, such as it is, they pass over the consideration of the human mind and its powers and works, with "heads uncovered" and "in solemn silence". The project becomes popular ; money flows in apace; a charter is obtained; professors are ap- p<:)inted, lectures given, examinations passed, degrees awarded : — what sort of exactness or trustworthiness, what j»hilosophical largeness, will attach to views formed in an intellectual atmosphere thus deprived of some of the constituent elements of daylight? What judgment will foreign countries and future times pass on the labours of the most acute and accomplished of the philosophers who have been parties to so porten- tous an unreality? Here are professors gravely lecturing on medicine, or history, or political economy, who, so far from being bound to acknow- ledge, are free to scoff at the action of mind upon 6 84 DISCOURSE III. matter, or of mind upon mind, or the claims of mu- tual justice and charity. Common sense indeed and public opinion set bounds at first to so intolerable a licence ; yet, as time goes on, an omission which was originally but a matter of expedience, commends it- self to the reason ; and at length a Professor is found, more hardy than his brethren,* still however, as he himself maintains, with sincere respect for domestic feelings and good manners, who takes on him to deny psychology in toto, to pronounce the influence of mind in the visible world a superstition, and to account for every efiect, which is found in it, by the operation of physical causes. Hitherto life and volition were accounted real powers ; the muscles act, and their action cannot be represented by any scientific ex- pression; a stone flies out of the hand, and the pro- pulsive force of the muscle resides in the will ; but there has been a revolution, or at least a new theory in philosophy, and our Professor, I say, in a brilliant Lecture before a thronging audience, after speaking with the highest admiration of the human intellect, limits its independent action to the region of speculation, and denies that it can be a motive principle, or can exercise a special interference, in the material world. He ascribes every work, or ex- ternal act, of man to the innate force or soul of the physical universe. He observes that spiritual agents are so mysterious and unintelligible, so uncertain in their laws, so A'ague in their operation, so sheltered BE.VRLNCi or THEOLOGY ON OTHER KNOWLEDGE." 85 from experience, that a wise man Avill have nothing to say to them. They belong to a different order of causes, which he leaves to those whose profession it is to investigate them, and he confines himself to the tangible and sure. Human exploits, human devices, human deeds, human productions, all that comes under the scholastic terms of "genius" and "art", and the metaphysical ideas of "duty", "right", and "heroism", it is his office to contemplate all these merely in their place in the eternal system of physical cause and effect. What indeed is art, confessedly, but a modification and a microcosm of nature ? Was not Bacon himself obliged to allow that no one overcomes Nature but by yielding to her? Warming with his subject, the Lecturer undertakes to show how the whole fabric of material civilization has arisen from the con- structive powers of physical elements and physical laws. He descants upon palaces, castles, temples, exchanges, bridges, causeways, and shows that they never could have grown into the imposing dimensions which they present to us, but for the laws of gravitation and the cohesion of part witli part. The pillar would come down, the loftier the more speedily, did not the centre of gravity fall within its base ; and the most admired dome of Palladio or Sir Christopher would give way, were it not for the happy principle of the arch. He surveys the com- plicated machinery of a single day's arrangements in a private family ; our dress, our furniture, our hospi- 86 DISCOURSE III. table board ; what would become of them, he asks, but for the laws of physical nature? Firm stitches have a natural power, in proportion to the toughness of the material adopted, to keep together separate portions of cloth; sofas and chairs could not turn upside down, even if they would ; and it is a pro- perty of caloric to relax the fibres of animal matter, acting on water in one way, on oil in another, and this is the whole mystery of the most elaborate cuisine: — but I should be tedious, if I continued the illustration. Now, Gentlemen, pray understand how it is to be here applied. I am not supposing that the principles of Theology and Psychology are the same, or arguing from the works of man to the works of God, which Paley has done, which Hume has protested against. I am not busying myself to prove the existence and attributes of God, by means of the Argument from design. I am not proving any thing at all about the Supreme Being. On the contrary, I am assuming His existence, and I do but say this: — that, man existing, no University Professor, who had suppressed in physical lectures the idea of volition, who did not take volition for granted, could escape a one-sided, a radically false view of the things, which he discussed; not indeed that his own definitions, principles, and laws would be wrong, or his abstract statements, but his considering his own study to be the key of every thing that takes place on the face of the earth, and BEARING OF THEOLOGY ON OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 87 his passing over anthropology, here would be his error. I say, it would not be his science which was untrue, but his so-called knowledge which was unreal. He would be deciding on facts by means of theories : he would forget the Poet's maxim, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy". The various busy world, spread out before our eyes, is physical, but it is more than physical ; and, in making its actual system identical with his scientific analysis, formed on a particular aspect, such a Pro- fessor as I have imagined was betraying a want of philosophical depth, and an ignorance of what an University Education ought to be. He was no longer a teacher of liberal knowledge, but a narrow-minded bigot. While his doctrines professed to be conclu- sions formed upon an hypothesis, they were undenia- ble ; not, if they professed to give results in fact which he could grasp and take possession of Grant- ing indeed, that a man's arm is moved by a simple phy- sical cause, then of course, we may dispute about the various external influences, which, when it changes its position, sway it to and fro, like a scarecrow in a garden ; but to assert that the motive cause is physical, this is an assumption in a case, when our question is about a matter of fact, not about the logical consequences of an assumed premiss. And, in like manner, if a people prays, and the wind 88 DISCOURSE III. changes, the rain ceases, the sun shines, and the harvest is safely housed, when no one expected it, our Professor may, if he will, consult the barometer, discourse about the atmosphere, and throw what has happened into an equation, ingenious, if not true ; but, should he proceed to rest the phenomenon, in matter of fact, simply upon a physical cause, to the exclusion of a divine, and to say that the given case actually belongs to his science because other like cases do, I must tell him, Ne sufor ultra crepi- dam: he is making his particular craft usurp and occupy the universe. This then is the drift of my illustration. Our excluding volition from our range of ideas, is a denial of the soul ; and our ignoring divine agency is a virtual denial of God. Moreover, supposing man can will and act of himself in spite of physics, to shut up this great truth, though one, is to put our whole encyclopedia of knowledge out of joint; and supposing God can will and act of Himself in this world which He has made, and we deny or slur it over, then we are throwing the circle of universal science into a like, or a far worse confusion. Worse incomparably, for the idea of God, if there be a God, is infinitely higher than the idea of man, if there be man. If to blot out man's agency is to deface the book of knowledge, on the supposition of that agency existing, what must it be, supposing it exists, to blot out the agency of God ? See, Gentle- EEARIXG OF THEOLOGY ON OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 89 men, I have now run beyond the first portion of the argument to which this Discourse is devoted. I have hitherto been engaged in showing that all the sciences come to us, to use scholastic language, per modum unhis^ that they all relate to one and the same in- tegral subject matter, that each separately is more or less an abstraction, wholly true as an hypothesis, but not wholly trustworthy in the concrete, con- versant with relations more than with facts, with principles more than with agents; needing the support and guarantee of its sister sciences, and giving in turn while it takes: — from which it follows, that none can safely be omitted, if we would obtain the exactest knowledge possible of things as they are, and that, the omission is more or less important, in proportion to the field which each covers, and the depth to which it penetrates, and the order to which it belongs ; for its loss is a positive privation of an influence which ex- erts itself in the correction and completion of the rest. This general statement is the first branch of my argument ; and now comes my second, which is its application, and will not occupy us so long. I say, the second question simply regards the Science of God, or Theology, viz., what, in matter of fact, are its pretensions, what its importance, what its influence upon other branches of knowledge, supposing there be a God, which it would not become me to set about ]>roving. Has it vast dimensions, or does it lie in a nutshell ? Will its omission be imperceptible, or will 90 DISCOURSE III. it destroy the equilibrium of the whole system of Knowledge ? This is the inquiry to which I proceed. Now what is Theology ? First, I will tell you what it is not. And here, in the first place, though of course I speak on the subject, as a Catholic, observe that, strictly speaking, I am not assuming that Catholicism is time, while I make myself the champion of Theology. Catholicism has not formally entered into my argument hitherto, nor shall I just now assume any principle peculiar to it ; for reasons which will appear in the sequel, though of course I shall use Catholic language. Neither on the other hand, will I fall into the fashion of the day, of identifying Natural Theology with Physical; which said Physical Theology is a most jejune study, considered as a science, and really is no science at all, for it is ordinarily nothing more than a series of pious or polemical remarks upon the physical world viewed religiously, whereas the word "natural" really comprehends man and society, and all that is involved therein, as the great Protestant writer, Dr. Butler, shows us. Nor, in the third place, do I mean by Theology polemics of any kind; for instance, what are called "the Evidences of Religion", or "the Christian Evidences"; for, though these constitute a science supplemental to Theology and are necessary in their place, they are not Theology itself, unless an army is synonymous with the body politic. Nor, fourthly, do I mean by Theology that vague thing called "Christianity", or "our common Christianity", BEARING OF THEOLOGY ON' OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 01 or " Christianity the law of the land", if there is any man alive who can tell what it is. I discard it, for the very reason that it cannot throw itself into a pro- position. Lastly, I do not understand by Theology, acquaintance with the Scriptures; for, though no per- son of religious feelings can read Scripture, but he will find those feelings roused, and gain various knowledge of history into the bargain, yet historical reading and religious feeling are not science. I mean none of these things by Theology, I simply mean the Science of God, or the truths we know about God put into system ; just as we have a science of the stars, and call it astronomy, or of the crust of the earth, and call it geology. For instance, I mean, for this is the main point, that, as in the human frame there is a living principle, acting upon it and through it by means of volition, so, behind the veil of the visible universe, there is an invisible, intelligent Being, acting on and through it, as and wlitn He will. Further, I mean tluit this invisible Agent is in no sense a soul (»f tlie world, after the analogy of human nature, but on the contrary is absolutely distinct from the world, as being its Creator, Upholder, Governor, and Sovereign Lord. Here we are at once brought into the circle of doctrines which the idea of God embodies. 1 mean then by the Supreme Being, one who is simply self- dependent, and the only being who is such; moreover that He is without beginning or Eternal, and the 02 DISCOURSE III. only Eternal ; that in consequence He has lived a whole eternity by Himself; and hence that He is all- sufficient, sufficient for His own blessedness, and all- blessed, and ever-blessed. Further, I mean a Being, who having these prerogatives, has the Supreme Good, or rather is the Supreme Good, or has all the attributes of Good in infinite greatness ; all wisdom, all truth, all justice, all love, all holiness, all beauti- fulness; w'ho is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent; ineffiibly one, absolutely perfect; and such, that what we do not know and cannot even imagine of Him, is far more wonderful than what we do and can. I mean one who is sovereign over His own will and actions, though always according to the eternal Rule of right and w^rong, which is Himself. I mean, moreover, that He created all things out of nothing, and preserves them every moment, and could destroy them as easily as He made them; and that, in conse- quence. He is separated from them by an abyss, and is incommunicable in all His attributes. And further. He has stamped upon all things, in the hour of their creation, their respective natures, and has given them their work and mission and their length of days, greater or less, in their appointed place. I mean too, that He is ever present with His works, one by one, and confronts everything He has made by His parti- cular and most loving Providence, and manifests Himself to each according to its needs; and on rational beings has imprinted the moral law, and given BEARING OF THEOLOGY ON OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 93 them power to obey it, imposing on them the duty of worship and service, searching and scanning them through and through with His omniscient eye, and putting before them a i)resent trial and a judgment to come. Such is what Theology teache:. about God, a doc- trine, as the very idea of its subject matter presupposes, so mysterious as in its fulness to lie beyond any system, and to seem even in parts to be irreconcileable with itself, the imagination being unable to embrace what the reason determines. It teaches of a Being infinite yet personal; all blessed yet ever oi)erative; absolutely separate from the crea- ture, yet in every part of the creation at every moment; above all things, yet under every thing. It teaches of a Being who, though the highest, yet in the work of creation, conservation, government, retribution, makes Himself, as it were, the minister and servant of all ; who, though inhabiting eternity, allows Himself to take an interest, and to feel a sym- pathy, in the matters of space and time. His are all beings, visible and invisible, the n«A)lest and the vilest of them. His are the substance, and the operation, and the results of that system of physical nature, into which we are born. His too are the powers and achievements of the intellectual essences, on which He has bestowed an independent action and the gift of origination. The laws of the universe, the principles ff truth, the relation of one thing to 'J 4 DISCOURSE III. another, their ([luilities and virtues, the order and harmony of tlie whole, all that exists, is from Him ; and, if evil is not from Him, as assuredly it is not, this is because evil has no substance of its own, but is only the defect, excess, perversion, or corruption of that which has. All we see, hear, and touch, the remote sidereal firmament, as well as our own sea and land, and the elements which compose them, and the ordinances they obey, are His. The primary atoms of matter, their properties, their mutual action, their disposition and collocation, electricity, magnetism, gravitation, light, and whatever other subtle principles or operations the wit of man is detecting or shall detect, are the works of His hands. From Him has been every movement which has convulsed and refashioned the surface of the earth. The most insignificant or unsightly insect, is from Him, and good in its kind; the ever-teeming, inex- haustible swarms of animalculte, the myriads of living motes invisible to the naked eye, the restless everspreading vegetation which creeps like a garment over the whole earth, the lofty cedar, the umbrageous banana, are His. His are the tribes and families of birds and beasts, their graceful forms, their wild gestures, and their passionate cries. And so in the intellectual, moral, social, and politi- cal world. Man, with his motives and works, his languages, his propagation, his difiiision, is from Him. Agriculture, medicine, and the arts of life, are His BEARING 0¥ THEOLOGY ON OTHER KNOWLEDGE. 95 gifts. Society, laws, government, He is their sanction. The pageant of earthly royalty has the semblance and the benediction of the Eternal King. Peace and civilization, commerce and adventure, wars when just, conquest when humane and neces- sary, have His co<>[)eration, and His blessing upon them. The course of events, the revolution of Em- pires, the rise and fall of states, the periods and eras, the progresses and the retrogressions of the world's histor}', not indeed the incidental sin, over-abundant as it is, but the great outlines and the issues of hu- man atfairs, are from His dis[>osition. The elements and tyjX'S and seminal principles and constructive lowers of the moral world, in ruins though it lie, are to be referred to Him. He ''enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world". His are the dictates of the moral sense, and the retributive reproaches of conscience. To Him must be a.<e omitted from among the subjects of their teaching? In a word, Keligious Truth is not only a portion, but a condition of general knowle DISCULUSE IV. friends, at least have no wish to oppose Keligiou, and are not conscious they are doing so; and it will carry out my meaning more fully if I give some illustrations of it. As to friends, I uuiy take as an instance the cul- tivation of the Fine Arts, Tainting, Sculpture, Architecture, to which 1 may add Music. These high ministers of the Beautiiid and the Noble, are, it is plain, special attendants and liandnniids of Keli- gion ; but it is equally i>laiii that tlicy are apt to forget their place, and, unless restrained with a linn hand, instead nf being servants, Avill aim at becoming principals. Here lies the advantage, in an ecclesi- astical point of view, of their more rudimental state, I mean of the ancient style of architecture, of Gothic sculpture and painting, and of what is called Gregorian music, that these inchoate sciences have so little innate vigour and life, that they are in no danger of going out of their place, and giving the law to Religion. But the case is very ditferent, when genius has breathed upon their natural elements, and has developed them into what I may call intellectual powers. When Painting, for example, grows into the fulness of its function as a simply imitative art, it at once ceases to be a dependant on the Church. It has an end of its own, and that of earth : Nature is its pattern, and the object it pursues is the beauty of Nature, even till it becomes an ideal beauty, but a natural beauty still. It cannot imitate the beauty iSKARINf; OF OTHER KNOWLEDGE OX TIlEOLnCY. 113 (.f Anguls and Saint3 wliicli it has never seen. At first indeed, by outlines and cnd)lems it shadowed out the Invisible, and its want of skill l)ecame the instru- ment of reverence and modesty ; but, as time went on and it attained its full dimensions as an art, it nither subjected Relijrion to its own emls, than ministered to the ends of Keli'rion, and in its long jrnlleries and stat«*ly chambers, adorable figures and sacred histories did but mingle amid the train of the earthly, not to say unseemly fonns, which it created, borrowing withal a colouring and a chanictcr from that bad companv. Not content with neutral ground for its Lo(;y. 1 1 7 would \Hi a serious evil, if it came as thu emblem aud advocate of a past ceremonial or an extinct national- ism. We are not living' in an aon the faith of others, had they l)een authoritatively hehl up lx,*fore him. Instances of this kind are far from uncommon. Men who are old enough, will rememlRT the trouble which came upon a p<»rson, eminent as a pmfes.sional man in London even at that distant day, and still mor«? eminent since, in consequence of his puhli.shing a hook in wliirh he so treate«l the subject of Comparative Anatomy, as to seem to deny the immateriality of the soul. I sp«^ak \\Qnt neither as excusing nor reproba- ting sentiments about which I have not the means of forming a judgment; all indeed I have heard of him makes me mention him with interest and respect; any how of this I am sure, that if there be a calling which feels its position and its dignity to lie in abstain- ing from controversy and cultivating kindly feelings with men of all opinions, it is the medical profession, and I cannot believe that the person in question would purposely have raised the indignation and incurred the censure of the religious public,' What • Siuca writing th»» abf a wealthy an«l llnu- rishing iHjople, it adds, "They have called the jn'Ople hapi»v that h:ith these things; hut happy is that ptH>ple whose God is the L(»rd": — while on the other hand it says with equal distinctness, '' If any will not work, neither let him eat"; and " If any nuin have not «'are of his own, and espJM-ially of those of his hous4', he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel". These opposite injunctions are summed up in tin* wi.«i4' man's pray«r, who says, *' Give me neither l)eggary nor riches, give me only the necessaries of life". With this most precise view of a Christian's duty, viz., to lahour indeetl, hut to labour for a competency for himself and his, and to be jealous of wealth, whether personal or national, the holy Fathers are, as might Ik? expecte". savs St. Chrvsostoni 'mv-s 122 DISCOURSE IV. with lliiii who knew nut where to hiy His head, yet could not restrain himself; and how canst thou hope to escape the contagion without anxious effort?" "It is ridiculous", says St. Jerome, "to call it idolatry to offer to the creature the grains of incense that an? due to God, and not to call it so, to offer the whole service of one's life to the creature". " There is not a trace of justice in that heart", says St. Leo, " in which the love of gain has made itself a dwelling". The same thing is emphatically taught us by the counsels of perfection, and by every holy monk and nun any where, who have ever embraced them; but it is useless to collect passages when Scripture is so clear. Now observe. Gentlemen, my drift in setting Scrip- ture and the Fathers over against Political Economy. Of course if there is a science of wealth, it must give rules for gaining wealth, and can do nothing more; it cannot itself declare that it is a subordinate science, that its end is not the ultimate end of all things, and that its conclusions are only hypothetical, depending on its premisses, and exposed to be over- ruled by a higher teaching. I do not then blame the Political Economist for any thing which follows from the very idea of his science, directly it is recognised as a science. He must of course direct his inquiries towards his end; but then at the same time it must be recollected, that so far he is not practical, but only pursues an abstract study, and is busying him- REARING OF OTHER KNOWLEDGE ON THEOUKIY. 123 self in establishing logical conclusions from indis- putable premisses. Given that wealth is to be -')Ught, this and that is the method of gaining it. riiis is the extent to which a Political Economist has a right to go; he has no right to determine that wealth is at any rate to be sought, or that it is the way to be virtuous and the price of happiness; I say this is to pass the bounds of his science, whether he be right or wrong in so determining, for he is only concerned with an hypothesis. To take a parallel case: — a physician may tell you, that, if you are to preserve your health, you must give up your employment and retire to the country, lie distinctly says "if"; that i>« all in which he is concerned, he is no judge whether there are objects dearer to you, more urgent ui)on you, than the preser- vation of your health ; he does not enter into your circumstances, your duties, your liabilities, the persons dependent on you ; he knows nothing about what is profital)le or what is not; he only says "I sjKJak an a physician ; if you would be well, give uj) your profession, your trade, your office, whatever it is". However he may wish it, it would l>e impertinent in him to say more, unless indeed he spoke, not as a physician, but as a friend; and it would Ixj extra- vagant, if he asserted that bodily health was the sumrnum honum, and that no one could be virtuous, whose animal system was not in pood order. Hut now let us turn to the tcacbing of tlie Poii- 1 24 DISCOURSE IV. ticiil Economist, a fcishioiiable philosoi)bcr just now. I will take a very favourable instance of bini ; be shall be represented by a gentleman of bigb cha- racter, whose religious views are sufficiently guaran- teed to us by his being the special choice, in this department of science, of a University removed more than any other Protestant body of the day from sordid or unchristian principles on the subject of money- making. I say, if there be a place where Political Economy would be kept in order, and would not be suffered to leave the high road and ride across the pastures and the gardens dedicated to other studies, it is the University of Oxford. And if a man could any where be found who w^ould have too much good taste to oflfend the religious feeling of the place, or to say any thing which he would himself allow to be incon- sistent with Kevelation, I conceive it is the person whose temperate and well-considered composition, as it would be generally accounted, I am going to offer to your notice. Nor did it occasion any excitement whatever on the part of the academical or the reli- gious public, as did the instances which I have hitherto been adducing. I am representing then the science of Political Economy, in its independent or unbridled action, to great advantage, when I select, as its speci- men, the Inaugural Lecture upon it, delivered in the University in question, by its first Professor, imme- diately on the endowment of its chair by Mr. Henry Prummond of Albury Park. Yet with all tliese BEARING OF OTHER KNOWLEDGE ON TUEOLOGV. 12.J circumstances in its favour, you will soon see, Gentle- men, into what extravagance, for so I must call it, a jrave lawyer is led in praise of his chosen science, merely from the circumstance that he has fixed his iiiind u[)on it, till he has forgotten there are subjects of thought higher and more heavenly than it. You will find beyond mistake, that it is his object to recom- mend the science of wealth, by claiming for it an ethical quality, viz., by extolling it as the road to virtue and happiness, whatever Scripture and holy men may say to the contrary-. He begins by predicting of Political Economy, that in the course of a very few years, ''it will niuk in public estimation among the first of moral sciences in interest and in utility". Tlicn lie explains most lucidly its objects and duties, considered as ''the •ience which t4?ache8 in what wealth consists, by what agents it is produced, and according to what laws it is distributed, and what are the institutions and i'ustoms by which production may be facilitated and distribution regulated, so as to give the largest possible amount of wealth to each individual". And he I wells upon the interest which attaches to the in- juiry, "whether England has run her full career of wealth and improvement, but stands safe where she is, r whether to remain stationary is impossible". After this he notifies a ccrtiiin objection, which I shall srt l>erore you in his own words, as they will furnish me with the illustration I propose. r_M; DISCOLKSE IV. This objection, he says, is, thiit, " as the pursuit of wealth is one otthe humblest of human occupations, far inferior to the i)ursuit of virtue, or of knowledge, or even of reputation, and as the possession of wealth is not necessarily joined, — perhaps it will be said, is not conducive, — to happiness, a science, of which the only subject is wealth, cannot claim to rank as tlie first, or nearly the first, of moral sciences".' Certainly, to an enthusiast in behalf of any science whatever, the temptation is great to meet an objection urged against its dignity and worth; however, from the very form of it, such an objection cannot receive a satisfactory answer by means of the science itself. It is an objection external to the science, and reminds us of the truth of Lord Bacon's remark, " no perfect discovery can be made upon a tlat i»r a level; neither is it possible to discover tlie more remote and deeper l>arts of any science, if you stand upon the level of the science, and ascend not to a higher science".! The objection that Political Economy is inferior to tlie science of virtue, or does not conduce to happiness, is an ethical or a theological objection; the question of its " rank" belongs to that Architectonic Science or Philosophy, whatever it be, which is itself the arbiter of all truth, and which disposes of the claims and arranges the places of all the departments of know- ledge, which man is able to master. I say, when an opponent of a particular science asserts that it does * See pages 11, 12. j Advancement of Learning. BEARI.VG OF oTllKR KNOWI.EDCE UN TIIEOL(m;Y. 127 not conduce to happiness, and much more, when its champion contends in reply that it certainly does con- duce to virtue, as this author proceeds to contend, the obvious (juestion which «:)ccurs to one to ask is, what does Religion, what does Revelation say on the point? Political Economy must not be alloweil to give judg- ment in itij own favour, but must come before a higher tribunal. The objection is an apj)eal to the Theologian; however, the Professor (hxjs not so view the matter; he does not consider it a ([Uestion for Philosophy, and if not for Political Economy, then not for science at all, but for Private Judgment, — so he answers it himself, and as fulK)w>: '* My answer", he says, '' is, first, that the pursuit of wealth, that is, the endeavour to accumulate the means of future subsistence and enjoyment, is, to the mass of mankind, the great source of moral improve- niLnt". Now observe. Gentlemen, how exactly this bears out what I have been saying. It is just so far true, as to Ikj able to instil wh:it is false, far as the author was fn.»ra any such design. I grant then, that beggary is not the means of moral improvement; and that the orderly habits which attend uiK)n the hot pur- suit of gain, not only mayeflect an external decency, but may at least shelter the soul from the temptations of vice. Moreover, these ha])its of giKxl i»nler gimrantee re- gularity in a family or household, and thus arc ac- cidentally the means of good to thos<' who come under their protection by leading to their education, and thus 1:^8 DISCOUKSE IV. acL'ideii tally providing the rising generation with a virtue or a truth which the present has not: Imt without ^a)ing into these considerations, further than to allow them generally, and under circumstances, let us rather contemplate what the author's direct assertion is. " The endeavour to accumulate'', the words should be weighed, and I'ur what? ''^ iov enjoyment''; — "to ac- cumulate the means of future subsistence and en- joyment, is to the mass of mankind, the great source", not merely a source, luit the great source, and of what? of social and political progress ? — such an answer would have been more within the limits of his art, — no, but of something individual and personal, " of moral improvement ". The soul, as regards the mass of mankind, improves in moral excellence from this more than any thing else, viz., from heaping up the means of enjoying this world in time to come! I really should on every account be sorry, Gentlemen, to exaggerate, ])ut indeed one is taken by surprise on meeting with so very categorical a contradiction of our Lord, St. Paul, St. Chrysostom, St. Leo, and all Saints. " No institution", he continues, " could be more beneficial to the morals of the lower orders, that is, to at least nine-tenths of the whole body of any people, than one which should increase their power and their Avish to accumulate; none more mischievous than one which should diminish their motives and means to save". No institution more beneficial than one which should increase the icish to accumulate! then Chris- UEARIXC; OF OTHER RXOU LEDOE ON T11E0L()(.K TJO tianity is not one of such beneficial institutions, for it expressly says, "/.ay not up to yourselves treasures on earth for where thy treasure is, there is thy heart also"; — no institution more mischievous than one whieU should diminish the motives to save ! then Christianity is one of such mischiefs, for the insj)ired text proceeds, "Lay up to yourselves treasures in hea- ven^ where neither the rust nor the moth doth consume, and where thieves do not dig throu^di, nor steal". But it is not enough that morals and happiness are nmde to dejxjnd on gain and accumulation, Religion is ascril»ed to these causes also, and in the following way. Wealth depends upon the pursuit of wealth; education dein-nds ujjon wealth: knowknlge depends on eest results of refinement; it reciuires in general to have been im- planted in the mind during childhoerstition''.' The pursuit of gain tlien is the basis of virtue. r.lirriMU, 130 iiisroi i:>i. IV. happiness; it being all tlio wliiie, as a Christian knows, the " root of all evils ", and the " poor on the con- trary blessed, for theirs is the kingdom of God". As to the argument contained in the logical Sorites which I have been drawing out, I anticipated just now what I should say to it in re})ly. I repeat, doubtless "beggary", as the wise man says, is not desirable; doubtless, if men will not work, tlu-y should not eat; there is doubtless a sense in wliich it m:iy be said that mere social or political virtue tends to moral and icligious excellence; but the sense needs to be defined and the statement to be kept within bounds. This is the very point on which I am all along insisting. I am not denying, 1 am granting, I am assuming, that there is reason and truth in the "leading ideas", as they are called, and "large views" of scientific men; I only say, that, though they speak truth, they do not speak the whole truth; that they speak a narrow truth, and think it a broad truth; that their deductions must be compared with other truths, which are acknowledged as such, in order to verify, com- plete, and correct them. In short, as people speak, they say what is true with modifications; true, but requires guarding; true, but must not be ridden too hard, or made -what is called a hobbj/ ; true, but not the measure of all things; true, but if thus inordinately, extravagantly, ruinously carried out, in spite of other sciences, in spite of Theology, sure to become but a great bubble, and to burst. BEARING OF OTHER RNU\S LLlMJE ON TIlE0LOf;Y. 131 I am getting to the end of this Discourse, before I have noticed one tenth part of the instances with which I might illustrate the subject of it. Els<- 1 should have wished esixjcially to have dwelt upMi tht; not unfrequent i>crversion which occurs of antieriess facts in past times, which we cannot deny, for they still are, though histor)' is silent about them. 1 suj.pose, on this score, wc ought to deny that the round towers of this country had any origin, l>ccause history does not disclose it; or that any individual came from Adam, who cannot pnxluce the table of his ancestry. Yet Giblwn argu«'S against the darkness at the Passion, from the accident that it is not mentioned by Pagan historians : — as well might he argue against the cxisteiur of Christianity it.self in the 132 DISCOURSK IV. first century, because Seneca, Pliny, Pltitai-cii. tin' Jewish Mishna, and other authorities are silent about it.* In a parallel way, Protestants arpue against Transul)stantiation, and Arians against our Lord's Divinity, viz., because extant writings of certain Fathers do not witness those doctrines to their satisfaction: — as well might they say that Christianity was not spread by the Twelve Apostles, because we know so little of their laboui-s. The evidence of History, I say, is invaluable in its place; but, if it assumes to be the sole means of gaining Religious Truth, it goes beyond its place. We are putting it to a larger office than it can undertake, if we countenance the usurpation; and we are turning a true guide and blessing into a source of inexpli- cal)le difficulty and interminable doul)t. And so of other sciences: just as Comparative Anatomy, Political Economy, the Philosoi)hy of His- tory, and the Science of Antiquities may be, and are turned against Eeligion, by being taken by them- selves, as I have been showing, so a like mistake may befall any other. Grammar, for instance, at first sight does not promise to admit of a perversion ; yet Home Tooke made it the vehicle of scepticism. Law would seem to have enough to do with its own clients and their affiiirs ; and yet Mr. Bentham made a treatise on Judicial Proofs a covert attack upon the miracles of Revelation. And in like manner Physi- *Vi(h tlie Author's work on Development of Doctrine, p. 139. BtAKING OF OTHER KNOWLEDCF. ON THEOLOGY. 1:^)3 ology may deny moral evil and human respon- .xibility ; Geology may deny Moses ; and Logic may deny the Holy Trinity ;' and other sciences, now rising into notice, are or will be victims of a similar abuse. And now to sum up what I have been saying in a tew words. My object, it is plain, has Ixien — not to -h<»w that Secular Science in its various departments may take up a jwsition hostile to Theology ; — this is rather the basis of the objection with which I opened this l)isc«)urse ; — but to point out the cause of an hostility to which all [nirties will Ix'ar witness. I have l>een insisting then on tlii.s, that the hostility in (juestion, when it occurs, is coincident with an evident dellection or exorbitance of Science fn^m its proi)er course; and that this exorbitance is sure to take place, almost fn>m the necessity of the case, if Theology lie not present to defend its own boundaries and to hinder it. The human mind cannot keep from specu- lating and systeniatising; and if Theology is not allowed to occupy iti* own territory, adjacent sciences, nay, sciences which are quite foreign to Theology, will take possession of it. And it is proved to be a usur- pation by this circumstance, that thosi' sciences will assume principles as true, and act upon them, which they neither have authority to lay down themselves, nor apj)eul to any other higher science to lay down for them. For example, it is a mere unwarranted assumption to say with the Antiquarian, ** Nothing • Vi«l. .VljelanI, for iii.^Uiic*-. l.'jl DISCOURSE IV. has ever taken place but is to be t'oiiinl in liistoricnl documents"; or with the Philos(»i)hic Historian, " There is nothing in Judaism ditlcrent from other political institutions"; or with the Anatomist, "There is no soul beyond the brain"; or with the Political Economist, "Easy circumstances make men virtu- ous". These are enunciations, not of Science, but of Private Judgment; and Private Judgment infects every science which it touches with a hostility to Theo- logy, which properly attaches to no science whatever. If then, Gentlemen, I now resist such a course of acting as unphilosophical, what is this but to do ns men of Science do when the interests of their own respective pursuits are at stake? If they certainly would resist the divine who determined the orbit of Jupiter by the Pentateuch, why am I to be ac- cused of cowardice or illiberality, because 1 will not tolerate their attempt in turn to tlieologize by means of Science? And if experimentalists would be sure to cry out, did I attempt to install the Thomist philoso- phy in the schools of astronomy and medicine, why may not I, when Divine Science is ostracized, and La Place, or Buffon, or Humboldt, sits down in its chair, why may not I foirly protest against their exclusiveness, and demand the emancipation of Theology? DISCOUKSK V. liKNERAL KN0WLEI)(;F, VIF.WED AS ONF, PIIILOSOPII V. It is a pn^valent notion just now, tliiit reli«;ious opinion (l(x.'s not enter, as a matter of necessity, in any considerable measure, into tlie treatment of scientific or literary subjects. It is supix>se(l, that, whatever a tea«'her's jK'rsuasion may Ik?, whether Christian «>r not, or whatever kinf a pupil at the new University?" I pass over tlie scoff at a miracle, to which the writer neither gave credence himself, nor imagined it in others; looking simply at liis argument, 1 ask, is it not puerile to imply that music, or dancing, or lessons in Italian, have any thing to do witli Philosophy? It is plain, that such writers do not rise to the very idea of a University. They consider it a sort of bazaar, or pantechnicon, in which wares of all kinds are heajK'd together for sale in stalls independent of each other; and that, to save the purchasers the tn>uble of running about from shop to shop; (»r an hotel or lodging house, where all ]»rofi'ssions and classes mh' nt librrfy to congregate, 1 10 DISCOURSE V. varying, however, according to the season, eacli ol' them strange to each, and about its own work or pleasure; whereas, if we would rightly deem of it, a University is the home, it is the mansion-house, of the goodly family of the Sciences, sisters all, and sisterly in their mutual dispositions. Such, I say, is the theory which recommends itself to the public mind of this age, and is the moving principle of its undertakings. And yet that very instinct of the intellect of which I spoke last week, which impels each science to extend itself as far as it can, and which leads, Avhen indulged, to the confusion of Philosophy generally, might teach the ui)holders of such a theory a truer view of the subject. It seems, as I then observed, that the human mind is ever seeking to systematise its knowledge, to base it upon principle, and to find a science compre- hensive of all sciences. And sooner than forego the gratification of this moral appetency, it starts with whatever knowledge or science it happens to have, and makes that knowledge serve as a rule or measure of the universe, for want of a better, pre- ferring the completeness and precision of bigotry to a fluctuating and homeless scepticism. What a singular contrast is here between nature and theory ! We see the intellect in this instance, as soon as it moves at all, moving straight against its OAvn con- ceits and falsities, and upsetting them spontaneously, without effort, and at once. It witnesses to a great r.ENEKAL KNOWLEDGE ONE PUILOHJl'llY. HI tnitli ill spit^ of its own professions and engage- ments. It had promised, in the name of the patrons of our modern Colleges and Universities, that there need not be, and that there should not be, any system or philosophy in kmnvkMlge and its trans- mission, but that Lilxiral Education henceforth should be a mere fortuitous heap of acquisitions and accomplishments; however, here, as it so often hapjK'ns elsewhere, nature is too strong for art. She bursts violently and dangerously through the artificial tram- mels laid iijMjn her, and exercises her just rights wrongly, since she cannot rightly. Usurpers an one hand to avoid the odium of not teaching religion at all, while on the other they equally avoid any show of contrariety between contrary systems of religion, and any unseemly controversy between parties who, however they may differ, will gain nothing by dispu- ting. Now I respect the motives of such persons too much not to give my best attention to the expedient which they propose: whether men advocate the intro- duction of no religion at all in education, or this " general religion", as they call it, in either case peace and charity, which are the objects they profess, are of too heavenly a nature not to give a sort of dignity even to those who pursue them by impossible roads; still I think it very plain that the same considerations which are decisive against the exclusion of Religion from Education, are decisive also against its genera- lization or mutilation, for the words have practically the same meaning. General Religion is in fact no Eeligion at all. Let not the conclusion be thought harsh, to which I am carried on by the principles I GENERAL KNOWLEDGE ONE PlIILUSOPIIY. 155 have been laying down in the former part of this Discoui-se; but thus it stands, I tliink, beyond dis- pute, that, those principles being presupposed, Catho- lics and Protestants, viewed as bodies, hold nothing in common in religion, however they may seem to do so. This is the answer I shall give to the proposition of teaching "general religion". I might indeed challenge any one to set down for me in detail the precise articles of the Catholic Faith held by Protes- tants "in general"; or I might call attention to the number of Catholic truths which any how must be sacrificed, however wide the ninge of doctrines which Protestantism shall Imj made to embrace; but I will not go to questions of mere fact and detail: I prefer to rest the questier they agree admirably, l)ut who does not know that loyalty and patriotism have one meaning in the ni<»iith of u Tory, and another in that of u Whig? Loyalty and patriotism, neither quality is what it is abstractedly, when it is grafted either on Whig or Tory. The case is the same with Keligion; the Establishment, for instance, accepts from the Catholic Church the doctrine of the Incarnation; but at the same time denies that Christ is in the Blessed Sacrament and that Mary is the Mother of God; who in consequence will venture to allirm that suurilV. lo7 future jucljrment, to say notliiiig of tlie mission vi Moses and Christ. These common doctrines we may if we please, call "Natural Ueligion", or "General Religion"; and so they are in the ahstract; and no one can douht that, were Mahometans or Jews numer- ous in these countries, so as to make it exi)edient, the (jovernment of the day would so absolutely take this view, as to aim at establishing National Colleges on the basis of such common doctrines; yet, in fact, though tiiey are common doctrines, as far us the words go, they are not the same, as living and breathing facts, for the very same words ]i:i\e a ditlerent drift and spirit when i)roceeding resi)ec- tively fix)m a Jewish, or a Mahometan, or a Catholic mouth. They are grafted on different ideas. Now this, I fear, w ill seem a hard doctrine to some of us. There are those, whom it is impossible not to resi>ect and love, of amiable minds and charitable feelings, who do not like to think unfavourably of any one. And, when they find another dilfer from them in religious matters, they cannot bear the thought that he diifers from tiiem in principle, or that he moves on a line, on which did he progress for centuries, he would but be carried further from them, instead of catching them up. Their delight is to think that he holds what they hold, only not enougli; and that he is right as far as he goes. Such i)ei*sons are very slow to believe that a scheme nf geiu'ial education, which ]mts Keligion more or 158 DISCOURSE V. less aside, does ipso facto part company with Reli- gion; but they try to think, as far as they can, that its only fault is the accident that it is not so religious as it might be. In short they are of that school of thought, which will not admit that half a truth is an error, and nine-tenths of a truth no better; that the most friglitful discord is close upon harmony; and that intellectual principles combine, not by a jjrocess of physical accumulation, but in unity t»f Idea. However, there is no misconception perhaps, but has something or other true about it, and has some- thing to say for itself. Perhaps it will reconcile the persons in question to the doctrine I am propound- ing, if I state how far I can go along with them; for in a certain sense what they say is true and is sup- ported by facts. It is true too, that youths can be educated at Mixed Colleges of the kind I am sup})0- sing, nay at Protestant Colleges, and yet may come out of them as good Catholics as they went in. Also it is true, that Protestants are to be found, who, as far as they profess Catholic doctrine, do truly hold it, in the same sense as that in which a Catholic holds it. I grant all this, but I maintain at the same time, that such cases are exceptional; the case of indivi- duals is one thing, of bodies or institutions another; it is not safe to argue from individuals to institutions. A few words will explain my meaning. There are then doubtless such phenomena as what may be called inchoate truths, beliefs, and philoso- CINERAL KNOWLEDGE ONE PUILOSUPUY. 159 phics. It would be both unreasonable and shallow to deny it. Men doubtless may grow into an idea by degrees, and then at the end they are moving on the same line, as they were at the l)eginning, not a different one, though they may during the progress have changed their external profession. Thus one school or party comes out of another; truth out of error, error out of truth; water, according to the proverb, chokes, and g«>od comes from Nazareth. Thus, eternally distinct as orthodoxy is from heresy, the most Catholic Fathers and the worst of here- siarchs belong to the same teaching, or the same ecclesiastical jnirty. St. C'hr}sostom comes of that Syrian theology, which is more proi)erly represented by the hetennlox Di(xlorus and Thecxlore. Eutyches, Dioscorus, and their faction, are closely connected in history with St. Cyril of Alexandria. The whole history of thought and of genius, is that of one idea being born and growing out of another, though ideas are individual. Some of the greatest names in many various departments of excellence, metaphysical, political, or imaginative, have come out of schools of a very different charack-r from their own. Thus, Aristotle is a pupil of the Academy, and the Master of the Sentences is a hearer of Peter Abelard. In like manner, to take a very different science: — I have read that the earlier musical compositions of that great master, Beethoven, are written on the type of Havdn, and that not until a certain date did he I«i0 DISCOLUSE V. compose in the style emphatically his own. The case is the same with public men; they are called incon- sistent, when they tire but unlearning their fii-st education. In such circumstances, as in the instance of the lamented Sir Robert Peel, a time must elapse before the mind is able to discriminate for itself between what is really its own and what it has merely inherited. Now what is its state, whatever be the subject- matter on which it is employed, in the course of this process of change? For a time perhaps the mind remains contented in the home of its youth, where originally it found itself, till in due season the special idea, however it came by it, which is ultimately to form and rule it, begins to stir; and gradually energising more and more, and growing and ex- panding, it suddenly bursts the bonds of that ex- ternal profession, which, though its first, was never really its proper habitation. During this interval it uses the language which it has inherited, and thinks it certainly true; yet all the while its own genuine thoughts and modes of thinking are germinating and ramifying and penetrating inio the old teaching which only in name belongs to it; till its external manifes- tations are plainly inconsistent with each other, though sooner in the apprehension of others than in its own, nay perhaps for a season it maintains what it has received by education the more vehemently, by way of keeping in check or guarding the new views. r.ENEUAL KNOWLEDGE ONE lllII.USdl'llY. IGl which are opening u\)ou it, and which slunlc it hy their strangeness. What happens in Science, Philo- sophy, Politics, or the Arts, may happen, I say, in Keligiontoo; there is such a thing as an inchoate faith or incomplete creed, which is not yet fully Catholic, yet is Catholic as far as it goes, tends to Catholicism, and is in the way t4j reach it, whether in tlie event it actually is happy enough to ix'ach it or not. And from the beginning such a creed, such a theology was, I grant, the work of a suiKrnatural principle, which, exercising itself first in the rudi- ments of truth, finished in its jierfection. Man cunnot determine in what instances that principle of grace is present and in what not, except iiy the event ; but wherever it is, whether it can be ascertained by man or not, whether it reaches its destination, which is Catholicity, or whether it is ultimately frustrated and fails, still in every case the Church claims that w<>rk as her own; Ixjcause it tends to her, because it is recognised by all men, even enemies, to belong to her, because it comes of that divine power, which is given to her in fulness, and because it anticipates iK)rtions of that divine creed which is committed to her infallibility as an everlasting deposit. And in this sense it is i>erfectly true that a Protestant may hold and teach one doctrine of Catholici-sm without holding or teaching another; but then, as I have said, he is in the way to hold others, in the way to profess all, and he is 162 DISCOURSE V. inconsistent if he does not, and till he does. Nay, he is already reaching forward to the whole truth, from the very circumstance of his really grasping any part of it. So strongly do I feel this, that I account it no paradox to say, that, let a man hut master the one doctrine with wliich I began these Discourses, the Being of a God, let him really and truly, and not in words only, or by inherited profession, or in the conclusions of reason, hut hy a direct appre- hension, be a Monotheist, and he is already three- fourths of the way towards Catholicism. 1 allow all this as regards individuals; but I have not to do with individual teachers in this Discourse, but with systems, institutions, bodies of men. There are doubtless individual Protestants, who, so tar from making their Catholic pupils Trotestant, lead on their Protestant pupils to Catholicism; but we can- not legislate for exceptions, nor can we tell for cer- tain before the event where those exceptional cases are to be found. As to bodies of men, political or religious, we may safely say that they are what they profess to be, perhaps worse, certainly not better; and, if we would be safe, we must look to their prin- ciples, not to this or that individual, whom they can put forward for an occasion. Half the evil that happens in public affairs arises from the mistake of measuring parties, not by their history and by their position, but by their accidental manifestations of the moment, the place, or the person. Who would say, for (JENEKAI. KNOWLEDGE ONE I'HILOSOPllT. 103 instance, tluit the Evangelical Church of Prussia had any real affinities to Catholicism; and yet how many fine words do certain of its supixjrters use, and how favourably disposess.examined and their radical heterodoxy brought to view! It is not so many yeai-s since, that by means of their ''common doctrines", as they woidd rail tln'ui, tliey |>ersuaded an ecclesiastical UhIv, as ditVerent from them, as any Protestant ImmIv which could Ije named, I ni- an the rulinsr party in the EsUiblishment, to join with tlK-ni in the foundation of an episcopal see at Jerusalem, a pro- ject, as absunl, as it was (nlious, when viewc«l in a H'ligioiis asjH'ct. Such t«>o are thr p<'rsevering att«'mpts, which excellent men in the Anglican Chunh have made, to bring about a l>etter umler- standing l)etwe«'n the Creeks or Kussians and their own communion, as if the Orimtal Church were not formetl on one type, and the Protestant Establishment on another, or the process of joining them were any thing short of the im|x)ssible exploit of fusing two indi- viduals into one. And the case is the same as reganls the so-called approaches of heterodox Ixxlies or institutions towards Catholicism. Men may have glowing imaginations, warm feelings, or l)enevolent tempers; tlu'y may be very little aware themsect, or a tone, which they cannot indeed analyze or account for, but which they cannot mistake. They may not be able to put their finger on a single definite error; but, in proportion to the clearness of their spiritual discernment or the exactness of their theology, do they recognise, either the incipient hertsiarch within the Church's pale, or the uidio|)eful inquirer outside of it. Whichever he be, he has made a wrong start; and however long the road has been, he has to go back and begin again. So it is with tin? bue reformed. And now. Gentlemen, I have arrived at the end of my subject. It has come l)efore us so prominently during the course of the discussion, that to sum up is scarcely more than to repeat what has l)een said many times already. The Catholic Creed is one whole, and Philosophy again is one whole; each may be compared to an individual, to which nothing can be added, from which nothing can be taken away. 1 06 DISCOURSE V. They may be professed, they may nut 1)0 professed, but there is no middle ground between professing and not professing. A University, so called, which re- fuses to profess the Catholic Creed, is, from the nature of the case, hostile both to the Church and to Philosophy, DlSCOUltSE VI. nill.OSnrilK AL KNoUI.KlH.K IT? <>N\N KM». It must not be supposed, that, in the remarks 1 have made in my foregoing Discourse on the organic character (if 1 may use so strong a word in want of a better) of the various branches of Knowledge, view'id together, that I have been merely pointing out a peculiarity, which we may recognise or not at 'iir pleasure; and that, on the ground, tor instance, that a System of knowledge is more beautiful intel- lectually, or more serviceable in practice, true tliough this may be, than a confused litter of facts, or a heap of observations or rules. On the contrary, 1 assumed the fact of a System, and went on to \yo\ut ut some of the consequences which it involved. I assume, not only as incontrovertible, but as more or less confessed by all men, that the various sciences, which occupy the field of Knowledge, have, not mutual relations only, but run towards and into each other, and converge and approximate to a philoso- 12 108 mscouRSi: vi. pbical whole, whether we will or no: — so active is the syiuputhy whicli exists between them, so rciuly is the human mind to recognise, nay so impatient to anti- cipate, the Principle of System in all matters what- ever, even at the risk of investing with laws and moulding into one, materials too scanty or too detached to sustain the process. Nor is it any unmixed compliment to the intellect thus to speak of its love of systcmatising; it is obliged to view its various creations all together from their very incom- pleteness separately. As well may we expect the various trades of a political community to be founded on a logical principle of division, and to expose nothing for sale in their respective windows, which has a place in the stores of their neighbours, as that the finite intellect of man should comprehend and duly parcel out the vast universe which envelopes it, or should achieve more than a series of partial and titful successes in ascertaining the object of its investigation. Thus System is but the resource of beings, who know for the most part, not by intui- tion, but by reasoning; and that large philosophical survey of things, which I have set down as the scope of University Education, is necessary to us, as well as beautiful, and a monument, not only of our power, but of our poverty. Here however, cautious and practical thinkers will consider themselves entitled to ask a question. They will inquire of me, what, after all, is the gain PIIILOSOPIlirAL KNOWLEDOE ITS OWN END. 109 -•r this Philosophy, of which I make such account, and from which I promise so much. Even supposing it to enable us to repose the degree of confidence exactly due to every science respectively, and to estimate precisely the value of every truth which is anywhere to be found, how are we the better for this master view of things, which I have been extolling? Does it not reverse the principle of the division of labour? will practical objects be obtained better or worse by its cultivation? to what then does it lead? where d«x'S it end? what does it do? how does it profit? what does it promise? Particular sciences are resiKiCtively the basis of definite arts, which carry on to results tangible and beneficial, the truths which are the objects of the knowledge attained; what is the Art of this science of sciences? what is tlu' fruit of such a philosophy? Or, in other words, un the supposition that the case stands as I have represented it, what are we proposing to eftVct, what inducements do we hold out to the Catholic commu- nity, when we set about the enterpri.se of founding a University? This is a very natural and appropriate, and to me not unwelcome, question; I even wi.sh to consider it. I agree with the objectors, that the representatives of a great interest cannot reasonably resolve, cannot be invited, to join together in the prosecution of an object, which involves odium, anxiety, trouble, and expencc, without having an end set before them. 170 Discoi'R'^F. vr. definite in itself, and commensurate with tlieir oxer- tions. I own, I have done very little till I have answered the question; and it admits a clear answer, yet it will be somewhat a long one. I shall not finish it to-day, nor in my next Discourse, but I trust, Gentlemen, that from the first and at once I shall be able to say what will justify me in your eyes in taxing your patience to hear me on, till 1 fairly come to my conclusion. However, T will not delay frankly to tell you what that conclusion is to be. When then I am asked what is the end of a Liberal or University Educa- tion, and of the Liberal or Philosophical Knowledge which I conceive it to impart, I answer, that it has a very tangible, real, and suflicient end, but that the end cannot be divided from that knowledge itself. Knowledge is capable of being its own end. Such is the constitution of the human mind, that any kind of knowledge, if it be really such, is its own reward. And if this is true of all knowledge, it is true of that special Philosophy, which I have made to consist in a comprehensive view of truth in all its branches, of the relations of science to science, of their mutual bearings, and their respective values. What the w^orth of such an acquirement is, compared with other objects which we seek, — wealth or power or honour or the conveniences and comforts of life, I do not profess here to discuss; but I would maintain, and mean to show, that it is an object, in its own nature PHILOSOniK AL KNuWLEDliE ITS OWN EXP. 171 SO really and umleniably good, as to be the compen- sation of a great deal of thought in compassing, and a great deal of trouble in attaining. Now, when I say that Knowledge is, not merely a means to something beyond it, or the preliminary of certain arts into which it naturally resolves, but an t nd sufficient to rest in and to pursue for its own sake, surely I am uttering no paradox, for I am stating what is both intelligible in itself, and has ever been the common judgment of philosophers and the ordinary feeling of mankind. I am saying what it least the public opinion of this day ought to be -low to deny, considering how much we have heard f late years, in opiMjsition to Ueligion, of entertain- ing, curious, and various knowledge. , I am but saying what whole volumes have been written to illustrate, by a '' selection from the records of l*hil(j- -ophy, Literature, and Art, in all ages and countries, •i' a hotly of examples, to show how the most unpro- pitious circumstances have been unable to conquer an ardent desire for the act^uisition of knowledge".* riiat further advantages accrue to us and redound to •thers, by its possession, over and above what it is in itself, I am very far indeed from denying; but, independent of these, we are satisfying a direct need