New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-06-05

JOHN WEISS, WENDELL PHILLIPS, boNhhii'
MOTT, THE REV o. Is. FkoIhiN"hA'i' NM
WATSON, AND OTHERS.
RosroY June 2.-I believe Byron speaks
somevbere OF a sky nllod with stars that looked as
tborch tbevvoud DO suns but burst not Mrs Sargents
parlors were filed yesterday with people VINO Iooheu
os II they would be Radical Club-and IL lnueeu 'hey
had been a Radical Club when L saw tneihs poio'o
but who now were not Radical oIup' Oo
causo Dr Hedge the essayst Of the occaSlon
has too much conservatism thoroughly 10 any ip'o'
with tho radical wing OF his own denomination, 'nu
chose 10 believe that no reading, not TO the per
cious Club aforesaid but to circle OF friehus
TO hear him in the Chestnuts parlors Ana SUCH lio
| a. they were Finer audience hath no nian' n''s
them the slvertongued orator, Wendell PhilpS' W. DE-
rockingham the cear-headed, keen-wtted ehhiiploh
of the Believing Unbelievers; your own Mr. smacy'
David A. Wasson John Weiss Mr.. Longfelow' anu LII
short whoever was brightest and best from
To tbs apprecatiye company Dr. Hedge read an essay
OH Pantheism which shall give you bref account
for think that your readers will like TO take IN WIN
their morning coffee clear sense OF what faoi" -
and ia not and the difference between it and Theisn
and thew could surely have no exponent thoroughly
| wel-informed than DIR. Hedge
Pantheson is name Of bad repue in theology, where
Il passes for something akin to Atheism, ana good uea
many noble souls have held 1t boldly In 172o the IN
gs Det Toland IN defense OF of S
universe, distinguished by reason alone rom tho ui
| III this statement or Panthelsm DO ac-
cepted have in it theory Disseminated IRON thelsn
proper by tho immanence In nature OF the supreme
the acknowledgment of Power TO which the tue OF Goa
isapped TOland, so far as we know, was the nrsl 10
assume the OF Pantheist. but he was by no means
| the first who held the Pantheistic faith. Nor does
| bis definition embrace all tho varieties or views
T wach a. mg Panhesm The PanSheis cheng de-
| clared that the Pantheists, SO far from main
tanning has been asserted that the sum OF sensible
objects is God, contend that the very of their
being objects of ia their priyation Of Deity
knowiedges God as the author of Nature, which, he
maintains, must have had beginning and cause. He
Erigena that wonderful intellect which lighted the
ninth century, commonly regarded pantheist; but
tween created and uncreaed. Even SpinOza emphasizes
causaity in God aud distinguishes between the infinite
conception of and effect 1t puts the universe
secondary, efect-and God primary, cause. 1t
cOnesses GOdsuper mundane, but not eXtra-mundane
And here comes in one principal point OF difference be-
The popular Thesm supposes God existing outside Of
the universe which He has made-a Creator who once in
time called universe into being, and has been ever
nOsubstanal connection with it, but only prOyidentia
and governmental one. INC God OF Panthesm isimma"
nent, inerused apenetratiDg, the ground of all de-
pendence the life OF all life 1t is true that the view OF
tic conception OF Deity. But this is only stage
That Thioh really and fundamentally Distinguishes Pan
theism. represented by spinoza, from Theism, az
usually understood, not the doctrine the one sub
stance but the doctrine of the sole agenthe denial
of any other agency than that of the one God
| world spnoza not only denies freedom OF
will to man, but denies to man substantial exist
| ence He considers the human mind TO be part Of
the infinite intellect OF God that when say the
but that Cod not in his nny but explained by the
nature of the human mind constituting tie essence
there is such entity the human mind soul
what call such is but thought of God. We accord.
ngly find 1t marked distinction between Theism and
Pintheism that the latter does not at all recognize that
attribute Of Deity which heism expresses by the term
Lord The God OF Panthcism Is in no sense Lord for he
has intelligent subcctshe mind or soul of man be-
ing only OF his own thoughts. But, to the Theis
godhead IL ordsip Therefore t appears that however
the Thestc and conceptions of God in nature
might he harmOnzed, their conceptions OF and his
relations 10 God must remain wide asunder The one
in man moral agent the other an Irresponsible
| spinoza the typical exponent OF Panthesm. His
system given to the world 200 years ago. remains TO this
statements. His influence upon thought has been inn
| mense. To him Goethe owed more than to any other
gratitude. schleermacher, in his Discourses on Re-
gion. bids sacrifice reverently TO the names of tho
holy outcast spinoza, who full of religion and OF
| the Holy Ghost Spnoza's ontology supposes single
and whole substance comprising all that is, and of
which all phenomena and all finite eXistences modes
and affections. Therefore he is said to have turned the
Majesty in which is all expression OF God.
He says that IN the nature OF things nothing Is cohh-
gent but all things are determined from the necessity
OF the Divine nature to certain mode OF existence anu
operation. You perceive this takes away all idea OF the
responsibility. Experience well as reason teaches"
| he alirms, " that men believe they are lfee5Ony
because they are conscious OF their actions ana ignorant
of the causes by which they are determined me great
ssts in the relaxation OF the moral sense consequent on
referring all action, good or bad to God as the one i'm
mediate and direct cause OF all ls great strength l5
the quokene1 sense gives Of the all pervadng and
immediate presence of God Ii has changed the divine
of copscionsness Thus il has given to Nature new
soul Wordsworth is the truest exponent OF thisseD
there is nothing which embOdies it, Greeks and Romans
painted landscapes like ours suggestive OF mystery
within and beyond The soul OF Nature is interpreted by
Pantheism. But Pantheism and Thesm are not OF ne
cessty contradictory termsthey should be complement
m. tl,n
ta care the moral will; Panheism gives us the diflsed
presence the aperyadns LIFE the divine nearness I'm IN
| world OF nature-to Theisn the world OF spirits
When the essay the audience began to talk,
us as II 1t thought it were Radical Club and Mr.. Weiss
was the first speaker He Endorsed DR.. Hedges state
ment that the Greek mind did not know what landscape
was The only panthelstc ideas Of which we find any
| trace in antiquity Egyptian. Their "Phanes "
meant emanation but it isolated idea in Egypt,
and when It was translated into Greek it became Pan
merely rural deity. To Socrates there nothing in
| a pane-tree but its shadow. Before TheocrtH, and
thence down TO Dante, you can find no such thing
as the projection OF human moods upon Nature. The
Greeks vexed Nature with personalities indeed gave to
every tree its dryad but they split with the prism of
plurality the pure white light Of its unity Music itself
was only born into the world when synthess was born
The sense OF the interfusion of Nature with
| God is modern. Not only did Spinoza turn
| the devil out OF the wOrld-he exploded also
the old idea that long ago God packed into the
tentiaes OF all that has happened since, and then
withdrew himself into vacancy. Spinoza shows that the
creative spirit is present every moment-God is always
| in the process.
Mr.. WATSON glad to have Spinoza appreciated but
| he himself had always felt certain want in hm-a
| linear character In all his speculaons. He did not
know projecting God into all things that
left no margin for resistance. 1t seemed to him quite
impossible reconcile with idea OF God the direct
derivation Him OF cankerworm and cobra, OF all
the evil which in ourselves and others. The OPP
position which has to be by God is the real
| devil and spinoza has not yet turned that out of