New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-10-07
MODERN INFDELTTY.

BY PROF JOHN CAIRNS, d. D.. OF BERWICK, ENGLAND
A subject so extensive as has been intrusted
TO me for discussion only be treated in fragmentay
way and with a view 10 supply materials for further
consideration 10 those who present at this days pro
ce edngs and who may read the reports Of the Confer
epce separate essay, and that long one would be
required for the full calculation Of such topic. limit
the Infdety the OF which are 70 be inquired
into to unbeef in the Christian revelation excluding
inquiry into tho Of Atheism Panthesm, aud spu
rous Theisn except far these bear upon tho
lection OF Christ as message from God. Even with
this restriction the inquiry is very extended and this
search into s only the half OF IT. for much would
need 10 he occupied with consideration of remedies The
Inhdelty whose need to be opened up in this
thesis designated Modern" is not like that against
which the early defenders OF Christ cOnteDded reec
ton Christ founded adherence TO another positive
re gOn TO the supernatural IN some other fOr but
rejection Of without leaving for at least
bracng any other proposed revelation 1t has therefore
affinity TO the philosophical unDeef OF the ancient
world against which also the early apoOgsts though to
a less degree, used their weapons; and may
include the forms OF Christ itself vaguely compre
hended in the general denomination of Ratonalism
which protesting TO admit Christ exalted
really deny its supernatural origin and strike out It's dis
time is suggested by this epithet d" Modern" "a
pOyed in the heading Of the paper afford me for dis
cussOn. 1t evidently cannot denote the whole period
included in modern history leaving behind the entire
manifestation Of unbeef In Christ before the close OF
the Middle Ages and taking up its whole appearance
since 1.-THE Reformation. think rather that the word
Modern" is intended IN the sense OF recent Iand at
least shall take IT, shall not however be careful to
distinguish between the 1Dfdety OF the last century
and OF the present To the contrast often drawn on
this head is less evident No donot there Is more reyer
ence and tenderness toward Christ on the whole even
on part of Its deniers than In the English Deistc
period or the French Revolution. But great con
Christ made in the eighteenth century
by writers unhappiy negative on the whole IKE Leasing
and Kant have since been yieded and the tone IN
many places OF Francis W. Newman and OF ReDan Is
deeply painful 70 Christian senslDles as mat OF ke
or OF NOltaire. THESE preliminary explanations
limiting the God OF our inquiry 10 the more recently
originated and sul continued forms OF me ae-
NAL or nonadmlSsiOh Oi eupeInHtuIal CniIst,
will prepare for the abduction OF teir causes or
these causes the widest classlncaton Is that Snch
ranks them as inward and outward or, IN technical
language subjective and objective The first ana deep
est class OF causes lies the state OF mind which deals
with Christ the second and far from unmportant hes
In kind Of exhibition OF Christ, and Its evidence
which is made to that receiving mind. We all hold
that II the state Of mind were right and II the Christ
presented the true Christ unDehef would be m-
impossible as unbeef IN reason IL ia from
the wrongness IN the mind or IN the OBJECT or IN D0th
varousy combined that all unbelief energies aud II IS
to this its recent, like all its past manifestations
are bo ascrbed. am at loss for words adequate TO
designate these two kinds OF causes OF unDehe but FOR
scandals using the word scandal more in the great
sense Of outward hlnderance or stnmblng'Dock.
SUBJECTIVE DFIDELTY.
Taking up these prejudices or states OF mind which
predispOse against Christ or even preclude Deer in
them altogether, they may be reduced again TO two
classes intellectual and moral rather these
exist separately those In which intellectual predposi
ton against Christ and those which moral predsposi
ton is the preponderatng element. There are other
side Of unbeef, they chiefly lead 70 the negative
revelation In common Win al allCECu feNels-
lions while the moral predspositions lead more TO the
rejection Of Christ because OF It's substance aud pecu
naFities.
l. Looking then, TO Intellectual prejudices which
lead 20 nfdey. the most common In our times IS the
disbelief of the possibility OF any revelation or such
persuasion OF its extreme unlheihOOd IA nearly
amounts 70 the same result. Much Of this no doubt
springs atheisuc or pauthestic root. Reyela
ton Is miracle; and on the scheme either Of atheism
or panthesin miracle is All absurdy for II Is effort
OF nature % transcend ITSELF and hence Spin0za justly
remarked that the adoption OF miracle suel as the
resurrection OF Lazarus would SKATER ms whole system
But even the ground OF protested theism detective
and fncOherent the views OF any thesis IN oures
tbat they regard miracle and hence the fundamental
miracle OF revelation, as incompatible with the reign
at law THIS tendency Is greatly confirmed by the wide
dienson OF sc!enI0c culture hxlDg TIE mind on the