The Manitowoc tribune. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1866-1878, 1874-10-15

are Ike IIlCSOu LII MdCOOAdASA AsOOOA y
Falconer," almost in the darkness OF
despair.
After speaking of what God ought
| to be if there we're one, he despalrlngly
exclaims, s'But what is the good OF 1t
| all? I don't even know that there IS
| anything outside of me-
eye know that am here, Mr.. Eric
son" suggested Robert.
81 know nothing of the sort you may
be another phantom, only clearer.
eye spick as if ye thocht me some
body"
$50 does the man to his phantoms,
and you call him mad. I cannot know
if there is anything outside OF me.
ssBut if there warna there wad be nae
body for We to love, Mr.. Ericsson.
| "Of course not.
''Nor naebody to love you, Mr., Eric
son."
''Of course not
"Syne ye wad be ye ain God, Mr..
Ericsson
| eyes, that would follow"
| 81 Gamma imagine waur hell-closed
in amo naething a ABBOTT We inkin' some
thing a. the time-knowing its a. lee
and nae able to win clear Of"
cit is hell, my boy, or anything worse
you can call it.
'sWhat far sud We believe that then,
Mr. Ericsson? I wadnia believe sic an
Ill thing as that I don't think [ could
believe it if we war to pruv't me-
sI don't believe it. Nobody could
prove it either, even If it were SO. ] am
| only miserble that [ can't prove the con-
trary.'
What can be more terrible than the
| feeling of an isolated individualism, all
| alone, with phantoms moving all about
us, yet with no faith in their reality? Do
you wonder that they who have felt the
| bitterness of unsatisied doubts are I'M
willing to speak word that shall shake
the faith of happy believer?
There is only one kind OF sceptlclsm,
however, that is really dangerous, and
that is an irreverent scepticism. We 90
| not in our common conversation make
| sufficient distinction between a sceptic
| and an infdel, or between head scepti-
cism and heart scepticism. An unfaithful
heart, or III other words, life that IS
| false to the convictions of the reason, is
| the dangerous unbeiever.
Unfaithfulness to any trust or convic
ton is infdelity, and that is the only
kind of infidelity Z recognize by the
name. The man who fully believes in
God and the old theologies, yet lies as
if he believed in nothing. is the infidel,
and our prisons are full of such charact
! ers.
An honest sceptic, who doubts be
cause he finds no ground for the belief
that is given him, yet who is ever seek
ing for the infinite truth, who is true
to whatever convictions he may have,
shall be our brother, and entitled to re-
ceive whatever aid our poor human
hands may be able to accord to him.
An Legitimate scepticism is that which
disbeieves for 10 reason except that it
sees some foolish things among believers.
David Hume, the representative scep-
tic, only showed the faults of the logic
of his day,-that nothing could be per-
fcetly proven from the plane of the under
standing by the fine senses alone.
Though sceptic, he WIS not an infdel,
for he was true to what he did believe,
and he believed much.
Thomas Payne attacked the bible and
Christianity with the rough, coarse in
struments of his day, and his name has
been stiglnatized by the odious, epithet
but Payne was far from being an atheist
OF an infdel, and had his biblical
scholarship been equal to his political,
and had he written with critical cand-
on in polite English, rather than in
vulgar, he would have ranked among
the liberal Christians Of the present
time. He believed in God and future
life, but not according to the church.
He was true to what he did believe, but
he was satirist rather than polemist,
he ridiculed the old instead of giving
a reason for the new, tore down instead
OF building up SO that instead of being
ahead of his age, he was far behind his
contemporaries SALISBURY and Boiling
broke.
America honors him for his political as
slstance. She ignors him, and rightly,
on account of his religious destructive
ness.
A legitimate scepticism is that which
is implied by the exact meaning of the
word
Its uses are apparent. All the great
movements III the religious or scientific
world are the outgr owths of scepti-
cism. A scepticism however which came
from higher instinct. Yet it was a
doubt which in many instances cost the
doubter his life. Calico was one of
them. He doubted the fairness of
the earth before he was sure of it's
roundness. Socrates was poisoned be-
cause he lost his faith in the gods, but
Plato has presented us belief of his
which is far from negative. Peter and
Thomas wavered in their minds. The
prophets and patriarchs of all religions
questioned and considered. Even Jesus.
who stands for an incarnate faith. was
once troubled by doubt when in agony
upon the cross. Yet He stands almost
alone as an example of one who came as
preacher of new doctrines, that were
distinctively hostile in their character,
building up belief without attempting
to pull down the old. This fact alone
is almost enough to prove supernatur-
al origin.
Doubts, after all, go no deeper than
the intellect. Be doubts ever so deep
and strong, we have somewhere in our
being faith that is :n11ch stronger
looking for the mastery. A blind faith