The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 12 (of 12)Hazlitt, William
General
The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 12 (of 12)
Hazlitt, William
English essays -- 19th century
Sir Isaac turned the world upon its back, and divided
heaven from itself, and removed it far from every one of us. As we
thought the universe turned round the earth as its pivot, so religion
turned round man as its center, as the sole, important, moral and
accountable agent in existence. But there are other worlds revolving in
infinite space, to which this is a speck. Are they all desert,
worthless? Were they made for us? Have they no especial dispensations of
life and light? Have we alone a God, a Saviour, revealed to us? Is
religion triumphant only here, or is it itinerant through each? It can
hardly seem that we alone have occupied the thoughts or been the sole
objects of the plans of infinite wisdom from eternity—that our life,
resurrection, and judgment to come, are the whole history of a
wide-seeing Providence, or the loftiest events in the grand drama of the
universe, which was got up as a theatre only for us to perform our petty
parts in, and then to be cast, most of us, into hell fire? Dr.
Chalmers’s Astronomical Discourses indeed may be said to dwarf his
mighty subject, and make mankind a very Lilliputian race of beings,
which this Gulliver in vain dandles in the hard, broad, brawny hand of
school divinity, and tries to lift into their bigotted self-sufficiency
and exclusive importance again. How does he answer his own objection,
and turn the tables on himself—how reverse this pitiful, diminished
perspective, and aggrandise us in our own estimation once more as
undoubted heirs of heaven or of hell—the sole favoured or reprobated
sons of God? Why, his answer is this—that the microscope has done as
much to lift man in the scale of being, and to enlarge the bounds of
this atom the earth, as the telescope has done to circumscribe and
lessen it; that there are infinite gradations BELOW man, worlds within
worlds, as there are degrees of being above, and stars and suns blazing
round each other; that, for what we know, a speck, a lucid drop
circulating in a flea’s back, may be another habitable globe like
this!—And has that, too, a revelation of its own, an avenging God, and a
Christ crucified? Does every particle in a flea’s back contain a Mosaic
dispensation, a Popish and a Protestant religion? Has it its Tron Church
and its Caledonian Chapel, and Dr. Chalmers’s Discourses and Mr.
Irving’s Orations in little? This does not seem to obviate the
difficulty, but to increase it a million-fold. It is his objection and
his answer to it, not ours: if blasphemy, it is his; and, if orthodoxy,
he is entitled to all the credit of it. But his whole scheme shows how
impossible it is to reconcile the faith delivered to the saints with the
subtleties and intricacies of metaphysics. It displays more pride of
intellect than simplicity of heart, is an insult equally on the
understandings or prejudices of men, and could only have been hit upon
by that personification and abstraction of cross-purposes, a Scotch
metaphysical divine. In his general preaching, Dr.
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