New-York tribune., 1871-08-01

announcement of DIR. McCosh is the precise reverse
of historical Truth. DR.. Claiming the apostle Of
intuition. never of ratiOnalism. At an early period
of his life he was deeply impressed with the doctrines
of Richard Price, the eminent English dissenting
minister who applied the teachings of Plato to the
foundation of morals, maintaining its seat in the
intuions of the soul, in opposition to the pre-
valent mechanical and utilitarian theories
of Hartley and Priestley-and that impression
never passed away. Later in his experience, Dr..
Claiming became acquainted through the medium
of a friend,-as he was not German sudent,-w
the views of Scheiemacher, and other German
writers who base religion on emotion instead Of
thought. and who gave the death-bow to the cur
rent rationalism of their day. With these views he
at once conceived profound sympathy, recognizing
in them the echoes of his earlier sentiments, and re-
ioicing in the confirmation which they gave to his
long-cherished convictions The transition from
DR.. Claiming to Theodore Parker was a change
from intuition and feeling to logic and ratonalism,
although Parker ignored no element of human na-
ture,-instead of the process which DIR. McCOSh de-
scrbes.
The creed of Theodore Parker is stated by DR..
McCosh to have consisted of three articles namely,
the consciousness of God, the intuition OF moral
law and the instinct of immortality. He got the
inspiration which led to all this from the works of
Carlyle and Coleridge, reprinted in America, and
reviews and translations of Cousin" Now it is a
singular assumption, if Theodore Parkers theology
was founded on consciousness and intuition, that he
should have drawn it from the study of books. The
assumption becomes still more remarkable when
reflect that neither Cousin nor Carlyle has set
forth any dogmatc theses in theology, Dor
given hint for the construction of
a religions system; while everybody who knew Par
Iyor MT a of of ('plpri1np ~
even of every pretender to philosophy, he was no
admirer much less a follower of that incoherent and
fragmentary discourser. To one acquainted with
the excursive character of Theodore Parkers
studies and the breadth of his scholarship in every
modern language the assertion that he was indebted
TO reviews and translatiOns of Cousin and to
American reprints Of Carlyle and ColcIidgc' is
more than amusing, il is astounding.
DR.. McCosh repeatedly alludcs to the Influence of
Coleridge in the development of the Boston theolo-
gy which he identifies with the views of DIR. Chan
ming Theodore Parker, and L. w. Emerson. But
this is total misapprehenson. The writings of
Coleridge had little if any effect on the opinions of
those men, or of what has been styled the Boston
Transcendental School. 1t was entirely
another set of thinkers who hailed the
utterances of COleridgc asa new apocalypse. BE was
heraded as a conservator of orthodoxy, never rs an
novations of the day, than to advance novel concep
tions in theology, that Coerdge was held pin New
England as glorious light ncwrsen in the religious
armament. His disciples were in the front ranks of
the Evangelical faith of them prominent as the
defenders of pure and undilutod Calvinism.
They comprised the distinguished names of
President Marsh, Professor Shedd, the Rev.
George b. Cheever the Rev. Caleb Sprague
Henry, at that time a conspicuous clergyman in
the orthodox Congregational Church, and Richard
II. Dana, the retired poet, but then leading con
trbutor to the spirit Of the Pilgrims" an uncOn-
promising Calvinistic periodical edited by Professor
Pond, man of as ngid and tTenchant orthodoxy rs
John Calvin himself The error of DR.. McCosh is of
as gross a character if he had said that Dr. Chal
mers, Hugh Miller, and Sir William Hamilton, had
derived their religious opinions from the study of
Jeremy Bentham and James Mill.
IfDr. McCosh should feel himself called upon 10 re-
wise his description of the genesis and development
of Boston theology, he may perhaps discover a sys-
TEN entitled to that name although one III all re-
spects the opposite of the school which he has de-
pctcd in such imaginary colors. The leader of the
true Boston theology was Professor andrews Norton,
of Harvard University, n scholar Of rare attain
ments of remarkable strength of character, OF wide
personal influence, and of dOgmatic earneStneSs of
conviction which was often thought TO trench
upon the freedom of religious inquiry. Prom
nent in these theOlOgical ranks Professor Henry
Ware. of Cambridge, the Rev. Henry Ware ir. the
Rev Francis Parkman, the Rev. Alexander Young
the Rev. Ezra stiles Gannett, and other learned d
vines respected for their integrity of purpose and
beloved for their amiable characters. This system
wasfounded on the supernatural revelation of Chris
tianty sustained by the authority of miracles, and
purified from the corruption, of ages by passing
through the aembic of Untariausm Ii was taught
in the pulpit of the Harvard College chapel, it pre-
vailed extensively in Massachusetts. il the dom
naut faith of the wealth. the aristocraey. and the
BIahGinism of Boston. If system of theology was
ever entitled TO take It's name from the seat of its
headquarters, il this old school of Cnitalianism
which has doubtless lost something of it pres
tige iii the progress innovation. But still includes
a large portion of the more "respccabc' classes of
New England society, regards the denial of the
Trinity az the chief end of man, insists the study
of Lockes philosophy, and the commentaries Of
RosenmglGr and Konine and believes in the saving
virtues OF rational habits of thought. and gentce
department. We may commend lis history 10 Dr. |
McCosh as a fit theme for his graphic but iapciu
pen.
With regard 10 the portion of the volume which !
treats Of the general evidences of Christianity, and
its relations to PsSitysin and other philosophical
of the age, WE find little that calls
for special comment. In the discussion of abstract
subjects, Dr. McCOsh is more at home than in the I,
of men, with whose opinions |
and personal traits he is not familiar His |
usually Ingenious often forci- !
bic, but perhaps not 50 often novel He /
writes with good sense ard good feeling, and the |,
effors into which he has been betrayed are the fIuit
of misconcepton rather than Of iL-will. The chief
value of his book, however, 80 our thinking is as
symbol Of the present state of religious and Scien
tfc thought. 1t shows the encrOachments of Sci !
ence the ancient domain of religion and the style
of barrier that is put up to save the premises
The old bank Of the river has been changed hT the
L. IL lilLn lis..rD.I