Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

together, that I beg to decline further correspondence." (page 88).

Apart from the unhappy manner of expression, there is much in the book deserving of attention. The Traveller is evidently a man who has read much, and who, having certain views, is not afraid to express them. It is true that, as might be expected, the correspondence leads to no very striking or satisfactory results. Certainly, neither party to it is converted on the spot. Possibly, however, one or both may have found in it food for thought, with results to be manifested hereafter. But, as it seems to me, both the Bishop and his tenacious and untiring opponent are rather far afield. Both identify Christianity with the creeds and forms now attached to it. In this, one sees ground for condemnation, the other a reason for insisting on the essential character of these creeds and forms. Neither perceives that, just as Christianity is but a channel-one of many-for Religion, so is the form of modern Christianity nothing more than a channel for Christianity itself, to be changed or modified as the needs of following ages require. The forms and creeds give expression, in their own fashion, to the essential Truth, but condemnation of them does not destroy that Truth, nor does the mere fact that they express Truth raise them to an equality with Truth itself. The Traveller quotes Emerson, but Emerson would never have endorsed this wholesale condemnation of creeds and churches. His philosophy would reject a form which shackled the spirit, but it would not reject one which, however imperfectly, contained significance and reality. This, as I believe, is the case with most Christian forms and creeds, though the literalism of advocates, not less than of foes, has, unhappily, greatly obscured it. not despair that the Traveller will, some day, come to see this also, for, although he is evidently a great reader, he hardly seems, as yet, to have fully thought out all he has read. His pages are as full of quotations as though he were an extreme advocate of authority. He claims a vast array

of talent on his side, from Carlyle and Goethe to G. W. Foote and Mrs. Watts. But Carlyle and Goethe were never, in any proper sense or to any extent, unbelievers. Their heresy lay in believing more than the multitude. They affirmed truths of which common minds could form no conception. If the Traveller will enter into their spirit he will see that Christianity is, at least, one expression-good as far as it goes-of an universal Truth which is, itself, tied to no time and to no sect; and he will come to appreciate how much more important to mankind the beauties of Christianity are than its defects.

In this book the advocates of Secularism and Christianity thus define their respective systems :

"With Secularists Religion is the rule of life! They believe that the essence of all true Religion is goodness, and that he prays best who works best." (page 44)

[ocr errors]

"I mean by a believer' one who believes Jesus to have been the Christ or Messiah promised and sent by God. This constitutes Christianity." (page 46)

So far, good. But the Traveller proceeds to say that Secularists

"Endeavour to explain the errors of an organization which has been well described by Diderot as 'the most absurd and atrocious in its dogmas; the most unintelligible, the most metaphysical, the most intertwisted and obscure, and, consequently, the most subject to divisions, sects, and heresies.' It is an entirely false system, the authority and foundation of which do not bear analysis, but which have varied 'to suit the pressure of the changing times,' although, in one respect, it has never altered,—the enslavement of men's minds and intolerance towards any who could not accept its dogmas." (page 44).

It seems a little strange that the writer of this passage should take umbrage at such a comparatively mild criticism of his own system as this of the Bishop's :-"The ultimate tendency of Atheism and Materialism is to produce immorality, not in each teacher of Atheism, but in society at large." (page 107.) In point of correctness, the two statements stand on a level.

1

Of the Bishop's part in this controversy no more need be said, for it occupies only a secondary place, and the book is published in the interest of his opponent. I have been constrained to criticise the Traveller, in some particulars, unfavourably. At the same time, no more serious charge need be brought against him than that his thought is immature. He has, in fact, not thought enough. He values information highly, and does not perceive that the advantage of knowledge depends on the thought which is brought to bear upon it. Thus, he praises the "noble workers," scientists, because they have but one motive-to gain knowledge," and he calls them "the saviours of humanity." But he does not seem to see that knowledge alone never can save humanity. You may know how to restore a half-drowned man and yet not be able to put your knowledge into practice when it is needed. Whether physically, morally, or spiritually, mankind will never be saved by merely knowing things. Philosophy, which is concerned with Thought, is not less essen. tial to Humanity than Science which is concerned with Knowledge of material facts. To an appreciation of the scientific stage our author has attained; he has yet to attain the higher realms of Philosophy, without which Science itself is comparatively valueless.

Walter Lewin.

SPELLINC REFORM.

THE Spelling Reform movement seems to be growing apace by the action of School Boards who perceive the enormous cost of teaching the mere rudiments of reading, caused by the glaring want of all rule in English orthography. Most of the arguments against the Reform are already exploded, and what few are left may, generally, be resolved into a

reluctance on the part of master-printers to reorganize their stock in trade. The printers have always been on the wrong side in this matter of spelling, many of the anomalies and absurdities of the present mode being distinctly traceable to their ignorance or stupidity in early days. So that, any difficulties now raised by them may fairly be set aside. The most often urged argument against a complete alphabet of English is that new and strange forms of letters would have to be invented; but how the 38 simple sounds of the language are to be expressed by—practically—23 letters, the objectors do not say. The important point is to make reading the easiest possible task in education, instead of, as now, one of the most difficult. To this end, it would be much better to become familiarized with a number of new forms of letters than to confuse ourselves with the elaborate series of rules, as to the various uses of the alphabet, which is necessary under the existing system. Mr. Isaac Pitman, a veteran in Spelling Reform, has already designed such an alphabet as is needed, and this has received the approbation of Professor Max Müller and other high authorities. Mr. Pitman, himself, has devoted almost a life time to this and kindred subjects, and has shown himself entitled to be heard. He has had to bear much ridicule, contempt and misunderstanding and it is gratifying that now, at length, he is able to look forward to the adoption of his teachings.

Another objection urged against phonetic spelling is that we have no standard mode of pronunciation, so that, even with a comparatively complete alphabet, either the spelling would be not perfectly phonetic, or, with different writers, different modes of spelling would prevail. This latter result however, we would hardly count as an objection, as it would give a color and character to the printed page, which, now. it sadly lacks. It would reveal to us something of its author, whether a Yorkshireman, a Lancashireman, a Scotchman or other. By this means, too, a certain fulness and richness of

[merged small][ocr errors]

pronunciation, which is found in some counties, would not be entirely lost: would, in fact, be the better preserved by its recognition in the local form of spelling.

Now that this question of reform in spelling has, through our system of national education, commenced to affect the pocket of John Bull, perhaps he will be induced to stir himself. Suggested innovations which are concerned only with mind and morals, he is pretty sure to ignore, but when he comes to see that, as things are, the School Boards are spending a great deal more on teaching children to read than they would have to do if reading were made easier, the case assumes greater importance in his eyes.

NOTICES OF BOOKS.

GERRIT SMITH: A BIOGRAPHY, by OCTAVIUS B. FROTHINGHAM. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

Our readers have already made the acquaintance of Mr. Frothingham as a writer, in that remarkable essay "The Real God" which was published in Papers for the Times for May last, and which has since been issued as a pamphlet. Mr. Frothingham is as much at home as a biographer as he is as an essayist or as a preacher, and, in writing the life of Gerrit Smith, he has been entirely successful. Gerrit Smith made himself a name in the United States by his untiring philanthropy. He chose to use his immense wealth for the benefit of his fellow men. Every great movement for the alleviation of suffering or for the removal of crime had his support. He was a powerful friend of the slave and an earnest, if sometimes mistaken, worker in the temperance movement. He had a remarkably keen sense of justice. On one occasion, when a mob took upon itself to chastise a man whose way of living did not accord with the popular

« AnkstesnisTęsti »