# The Collected Works of Theodore Parker/Volume 01/Book 2/Chapter 5

CHAPTER V.
STATEMENT OF THE ANALOGY FROM THIS RELATION.
Now it was said before, that the religious was the deepest, highest, strongest element in Man, and since the wants of the lower faculties are so abundantly provided with natural means of satisfying them, the Analogy leads us irresistibly to conclude, that the higher faculty would not be neglected; that here as elsewhere there must be a natural and not miraculous supply for natural wants, a natural guide to conduct from one to the other, and natural laws, or conditions, to be observed, and natural satisfaction to be obtained in this way; that as God was no step-father, but a bountiful parent to the lower elements, so he must be to the higher; that as there was a point of satisfaction out of the body, mind, and heart, for each desire in it, so there must be a point of satisfaction out of the soul, for each desire in the soul. Is it God's way to take care of oxen and leave men uncared for? In a system where every spot on an insect's wing is rounded as diligently, and as carefully finished off, as a world, are we to suppose the Soul of Man is left without natural protection? If there is a law, a permanent mode of divine action, whereby each atom of dust keeps its place and holds its own, surely we are not to dream the Soul of Man is left with no law for its religious life and satisfaction.
To draw the parallels still closer. By the religious consciousness we feel the want of some assured support to depend on, who has infinite Power to sustain us, infinite Wisdom to provide for us, infinite Goodness to cherish us; as we must know the will of Him on whom we depend, and thus determine what is religious truth and religious duty, in order that we may do that duty, receive that truth, obey that will, and thus obtain rest for the soul, and the highest spiritual welfare, by knowing and fulfilling ​its conditions, so Analogy teaches that in this, as in the other case, there must be a supply for the wants, and some plain, regular, and not miraculous means, accessible to each man, whereby he can get a knowledge of this Support, discover this Will, and thus, by observing the proper conditions, obtain the highest spiritual welfare.
This argument for a direct connection between Man and God, is only rebutted in one of these two ways: Either, first, by denying that Man has any religious wants; or, secondly, by affirming that he is himself alone a supply to them, without need of reliance on anything independent of himself. The last is contrary to philosophy, for, theoretically speaking, by nature there is nothing in Man, but Man himself, his tendencies and powers of action and reception; in the religious element there is nothing but the religious element, as, theoretically speaking, by nature, there is in the body nothing but the body; in hunger nothing but hunger. To make Man dependent on nothing but Man; the religious element on nothing but the religious element, and therefore sufficient for itself, is quite as absurd as to make the body dependent only on the body; the appetite of hunger on nothing but hunger, sufficient to satisfy itself. Besides, our consciousness, and above all our religious consciousness, is that of dependence. The soul feels its direct dependence on God, as much as the body sees its own direct dependence on matter.
If the one statement is contrary to philosophy, the other is contrary to fact. We feel religious wants; the history of Man is a perpetual expression of these wants; an effort for satisfaction. It cannot be denied that we need something that shall bear the same relation to the religious Element which food bears to the palate, light to the eye, sound to the ear, beauty to the imagination, truth to the understanding, friendship to the heart, and duty to conscience. How shall we pass from the want to its satisfaction? Now the force of the Analogy is this—it leads us to expect such a natural satisfaction for spiritual wants as we have for the humbler wants. The very wants themselves imply the satisfaction; soon as we begin to act, there awakes, by nature, a Sentiment of God. Reason ​gives us a distinct Idea of Him, and from this Idea also it follows that he must supply these wants.
The question then comes as to the fact: Is there, or is there not, a regular law, that is, a constant mode of operation, by which the religious wants are supplied, as by a regular law the body's wants are met? Now, animated by the natural trust, or faith, which is the spontaneous action of the religious Element, we should say: Yes, it must be so. God takes care of the sparrow's body; can he neglect Man's Soul? Then, reasoning again from the general analogy of God's providence, as before shown, and still more from the Idea of God, as above laid down, we say again: It must be so. Man must, through the religious Element, have a connection with God, as by the senses with Matter. He is, relative to us, the object of the soul, as much as matter is the object of the senses. As God has an influence on passive and unconscious Matter, so he must have on active and conscious Man. As this action in the one case is only modified by the conditions of Matter, so will it be in the other only by the conditions of Man. As no obedient animal is doomed to wander up and down, seeking rest, but finding none; so no obedient man can be left hopeless, forlorn, without a supply, without a guide.
Now it might be supposed that the spontaneous presentiment of this supply for our spiritual demands, this two-fold argument from the Idea of God and the Analogy of his action in general, would satisfy both the spontaneous and the reflective mind, convincing them of Man's general capability of a connection with God, of receiving truth in a regular and a natural way from him, by revelation, inspiration, suggestion, or by what other name we may call the joint action of the divine and human mind. Such indeed is the belief of nations in an early and simple state. It is attested by the literature, traditions, and monuments of all primitive people. They believed that God held converse with Men. He spoke in the voices of nature; in signs and omens; in dreams by night; in deep, silent thoughts by day; skill, strength, wisdom, goodness, were referred to Him. The highest function of men was ​God's Gift. He made the laws of Minos, Moses, Numa, Rhadamanthus; he inspires the Poet, Artist, Patriot; works with the righteous everywhere. Had Fetichism no meaning? Was Polytheism only a lie with no truth at the bottom? Prayers, sacrifices, fasts, priesthoods, show that men believed in intercourse with God. Good simple-hearted men and women, who live lives of piety, believe it now, and never dream it is a great philosophical truth, which lies in their mind. They wonder anybody should doubt it.
But yet among thinking men, who have thought just enough to distrust instinct, but not enough to see by the understanding the object which instinct discloses, especially it seems among thinking Englishmen and Americans, a general doubt prevails on this point.
The material world is before our eyes; its phenomena are obvious to the senses, and most men having active senses—which develope before the understanding—and the lower faculties of intellect also somewhat active, get pretty clear notions about these phenomena, though not of their cause and philosophy. But as the soul is rarely so active as the senses, as the whole spiritual nature is not often so well developed as the sensual, so spiritual phenomena are little noticed; very few men have clear notions about them. Hence to many men all spiritual and religious matters are vague. “Perhaps yes and perhaps no,” is all they can say.
Then again the matter is made worse, for they hear extravagant claims made in relation to spiritual things and intercourse with God. One man says he was healed of a fever, or saved from drowning, not by the medicine, or the boatman, but by the direct interposition of God; another will have it that he has direct and miraculous illuminations, though it is plain he is still sitting in darkness. This bigot would destroy all human knowledge, that there may be clean paper to receive the divine word, miraculously written thereon; that fanatic bids men trust the doctrine which is reputed of miraculous origin and even at variance with human faculties. Both the bigot and the fanatic condemn Science as the “Pride of Reason,” and talk boastingly of their special revelations, their new light, the signs and wonders they have seen or heard of to attest ​this revelation. The sincere man of good sense is disgusted by these things, and asks if there be no Pride of Folly as well as Reason, and no revelation of nonsense from the man's own brain, which is mistaken as an eternal truth coming winged from the Godhead? He rests, therefore, in his notions of mere material things; will see nothing which he cannot see through; believe nothing he cannot handle. These material notions have already become systematized; and so far as there is any philosophy commonly accredited amongst us, it is one which grows mainly out of this sensual way of looking at things; a philosophy which logically denies the possibility of inspiration, or intercourse with God, except through a miracle that shall transcend the faculties of Man.
Now on this subject of inspiration there are but three views possible. Each of these is supported by no one writer exclusively or perfectly, but by many taken in the aggregate. Let us examine each of them as it appears in recent times, with its philosophy and logical consequences. However, it is to be remembered that all conclusions which follow logically, are not to be charged on men who admit the premises.