New-York tribune., 1871-05-05
NEW PUBLICATIONS.

AVN RELIGION IN soNB oF TllKIa RELATIONS
rtbfoss1 sS J. q saInr. l2mO Pp ~. horc h"e,C
ube author of this work. who is TIE frihcipM
sol,ere in the University of st. Andrews was pupil
:, ,h late Dr Arnold, and fellow student with Afhur
-, o. ' % C,x ford whom he seems to have accompanied
q, che famed Bothie" party in the Highlands con-
sor.ble portion Of the volume, which undertakes 70
tscuss the connection between modern culture ana re-
sou. faith is occupied with the criticism OF Proies
80, Uuxlev's plea for scientific culture, and OF the
- ~ Mr. Matthew Arnold concerning the Importance
n, literary culture 20 perfection OF human nature Ihe
ubor finds fault with the principles set forth by Proies
,r Huxley on the ground OF their inadequacy as an eh
poton Of knowledge and their want OF sufficient motive
Ga produce the highest style Of action His theory fas
q supply the center by which is taken out OF him
81, and led 70 seek the welfare of others well his
own He furnishes for the formation OF the
tender Coincidence which he insists as an essential
element in noble character and presents no appear 10
the aspirations Of our higher nature Nor Is MI AT
nolds aesthetic theory Of human culture eompeteW
ADEQUATE to the wants Of man. Although IL
maintains generous and exalted views OF the
.apaetes OF the son. and offers motives OF quickening
newer in the work OF se-mprovemeDt Is detective as
true philosophy of life. His system harmon7es Win
religion in its demand for internal excellence for con-
tinua progress In virtue and for dsnteresed deVooh
90 he good Of others But he claims for culture an n
nuence which goes beyond religion, IN harmonious eA
snusion OF an the powers which make the beauty N
worth Of human nature. According to hr. Arnoio .,
EnglisL mind las directed too exciuANey -
moral and religious element There is conplo'o -
81 tho idea OF beauty, harmony. and sraeiouSl' 49,
human ex xcelence in the tough and serious AnE 'o 1850
,a,ure esueeisy rs 10 has been acted upon 0y '"o
dominance of Hebrew teaching IN tbe h''iO" :,
,,on The author recognizes, 10 certain eAo,' 80. ~
,,,rahle nonts in Mr. ArnOds theory bu1 Ao o.Io''
a tha secondary rank which II assigns W ioHe'VN'
,aov Who seek religion for the sake OF e"'ule,
~ usiD4a,ns are not religious, but estheuo anu
-u never gain the grace Wmeh relisio'
ad o eultre because they can never haVethe euSon'
g. ook religion for the sake Of the personal ee'auoh
TN IL brings IL 70 fall from the faith which rests I'D
,otion 20 God as the supreme good. The spirit Oh m.n
a, an instrlment which cannot give out It's deepest anu
rpest tones except under the immediate hand OF the
Uvine Harmonst Hence, before culture can ca forth
HIGHEST cauacitles Of which human nature Is sscepu
be n lnust cease 10 merely culture and pass over
into religion He will approach nearer perfection, VIII
attain IN A deeper, truer, lovely humanity, VINO
makes moi culture but oneness with the will OF Cod DIS
ultimate aim Another weak point in Mr.. Arnods
ecorv according to the writer Of this work is that
while Il makes the idea of slfperfection the starting
xnt II never gets clear the tant OF sefreterence
with which il set out No culture can protect man
from Thought about himself free him from the SELF
consciousness which fatal 10 high character shch
is the main drift Of the reasoning pursued 10y Professor
Sharp IN these suggestive essays They VIII be re"d
with satisfaction the temperance OF ther t0ne ana
the seholary refinement OF their Illustrations. even ny
these who fail 10 be affected by the force OF their argu
neuts The work gives impression OF originality Oh
remarkable acuteness Of thought but il helps to com
pete the circle which all onesided theories must leave
imperfect.