Modern French Philosophy: a Study of the Development Since ComteGunn, John Alexander
Philosophy
Modern French Philosophy: a Study of the Development Since Comte
Gunn, John Alexander
Philosophy, French; Philosophy, Modern
the Church, and he reminds the “Christians”[13] who railed against him
as an unbeliever that Jesus had had much more influence upon him than
they gave him credit for, and, more particularly, that his break with
the Church was due to loyalty to Jesus. By such loyalty Renan meant not
a blind worship, but a reverence which endeavoured to appreciate and
follow the ideals for which Jesus himself stood. It did not involve
slavish acceptance of all he said, even if that were intelligible, and
clear, which it is not. “To be a Platonist,” remarks Renan, “I need not
adore Plato, or believe _all_ that he said.”[14]
[13] Renan complains of the ignorance of the clergy of Rome regarding
his own work, which they did not understand because they had not read
it, merely relying on the Press and other sources for false and
biassed accounts.
[14] _Cf._ Renan’s Essay in _Questions contemporaines_ on “_L’Avenir
religieux des Sociétés modernes_.”
Renan is in agreement with the central ideas of Jesus’ own faith, and
he rightly regards him as one of the greatest contributors to the
world’s religious thought. Renan’s religion is free from
supernaturalism and dogma. He believes in infinite Goodness or
Providence, but he despises the vulgar and crude conceptions of God
which so mar a truly religious outlook. He points out how prayer, in
the sense of a request to Heaven for a particular object, is becoming
recognised as foolish. ‘As a “meditation,” an interview with one’s own
conscience, it has a deeply religious value. The vulgar idea of prayer
reposes on an immoral conception of God. Renan rightly sees the central
importance for religion of possessing a sane view of the divinity, not
one which belongs to primitive tribal wargods and weather-gods. He
aptly says, in this connection, that the one who was defeated in 1871
was not only France but _le bon Dieu_ to which she in vain appealed. In
his place was to be found, remarks Renan with a little sarcasm, “only a
Lord God of Hosts who was unmoved by the moral ‘délicatesse’ of the
Uhlans and the incontestable excellence of the Prussian shells.”[15] He
rightly points to the immoral use made of the divinity by pious folk
whose whole religion is utilitarian and materialistic. They do good
only in order to get to heaven or escape hell,[16] and believe in God
because it is necessary for them to have a confidant and sonsoler, to
whom they may cry in time of trouble, and to whose will they may
resignedly impute the evil chastisement which their own errors have
brought upon them individually or collectively. But, he rightly claims,
it is only where utilitarian calculations and self-interest end, that
religion begins with the sense of the Infinite and of the Ideal
Goodness and Beauty and Love.
[15] _Dialogues et Fragments philosophiques_, p. ix.
[16] One pious individual thought to convert Renan himself by writing
him every month, quite briefly, to this effect “There is a hell.”
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account