“No; the essence of the belief is the belief in the Divinity of
Christ. But accept that belief; think for a moment of all that
implies, and you must admit that your Christianity becomes
dogmatic in the highest degree. Our conceptions of the world
and its meaning are more radically changed than our conceptions
of the material universe, when the sun instead of the earth
becomes its centre. _Every view of history, every theory of our
duty, must be radically transformed by contact with that
Stupendous Mystery._ Whether you accept or reject the special
tenets of the Athanasian Creed is an infinitesimal trifle. You
are bound to assume that every religion which does not take
this dogma into account is without true vital force. Infidels,
heathens, and Unitarians reject the single influence which
alone can mould our lives in conformity with the everlasting
laws of the universe. Of course, there are tricks of sleight of
hand by which the conclusion is evaded. It would be too long
and too trifling to attempt to expose them. Unsectarian
Christianity consists in shirking the difficulty without
meeting it, and trying hard to believe that the passion can
survive without its essential basis. It proclaims the love of
Christ as our motive, whilst it declines to make up its mind
whether Christ was God or man; or endeavours to escape a
categorical answer under a cloud of unsubstantial rhetoric. But
the difference between man and God is infinite, and no effusion
of superlatives will disguise the plain fact from honest
minds. To be a Christian in any real sense you must start from
a dogma of the most tremendous kind, and an undogmatic Creed is
as senseless as a statue without shape or a picture without
colour. Unsectarian means un-Christian.“--From _Freethinking
and Plainspeaking_ (pp. 122-4), by Leslie Stephen. (Longmans,
London.)
The considerations which seemed to compel the clearheaded author of
this extract to his own well-known intellectual position no longer
apply. In England, at any rate, the Church is not bound down to any
mechanical theory of the inspiration of the Bible, and accepts all the
discoveries of Modern Physical Science without misgiving. Such books
as the late Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Temple) gave us in his
Bampton Lectures have long ago shown the futility of attempting to map
out the exact terms of a reconciliation between the claims of science
and religion, but they have shown that religion and science are _not_
destructive and contradictory of each other.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account