New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-08-11

movers are vaguely discerned by the mind. All
the discussion OF the last quarter OF century
has failed to settle the question IN what Eght
they were contemplated by early man. 1t Is not
clear whether he began by worshlpping objects
IN nature or the departed shades OF MS ancestors
or was from the outset capable OF grasping the
idea Of one supreme being. DR.. Menzies finds
the authorities generally in agreement on the
point that fetchism is not an original form OF
religion but product Of the decay OF higher
forms in unfavorabe conditions But the wor-
shin of nature and that OF ancestors seem To
have existed from the first. and the one cannot
in any case be derived from the other Above
ALL there was nothing like system IN the notions
which carly men formed about the objects OF
,be.r yorship The most highly civilized people
are capable of cherishing at one and Inc same
time religious beliefs which are inconsistent
with each other. How much more was THIS the
case with savagos 10 whom exact thought was
impossbe. The savage made his gods not out
Of nothing. but out Of a great variety OF ex-
neriences and Impressions" and ;hey acted and
reacted on each other IN an endless variety OF
ways Endless change endless occurrences OF
growth and decay filled up those great spaces
and periods measureless and trackless almost as
the expanses Of the ocean. that were covered by
the prehistoric life Of mankind
Ont Of these rudimentary religions. polytheism
emerged as soon as man began to give names
and A personality to the powers which ne wor-
shipped But polythe.sm does not necessarily
reou,re tho Worship Of many gods at once. There
10 a practical monotheism which insists on
reckoning with only one deity at a time and
investing 1t for the moment with all the at
tributes Of supremacy. and another form which
- ODDS
ono name with permanent overlordship. st.
Paul seems almost to lapse into this belief when
he saws. there are gods many and lords many.
I'm, n rs there Is one God" But the strictest
language Of monotheism denies existence alto
ge,her IN every rival deity. This is the con-
fession Of Islam though the Koran comedies
over and over again the existence Of many gods.
The belief IN the unity Of the Deity seems In
tho moot noteworthy examples OF its develop
ment to have kept pace in It's growth with the
growth of national feeling But in Judaism the
idea did not sion with the growth Of the nation.
hut advanced in the minds Of the prophets to the
form of universal religion on such lines as are
here indicated Dr. Menzies proceeds to show
how tho great religions rose on the basis or
nrimeval Worship and how Christianity COM
nIetes the evolutionary process by filling out the
defects of systems which In part its source
and in part its rivals The growth Of the worlds
religion has to be described in number OF par
alel narratives each dealing with the expert
ence Of a separate nation. Necessarily the
movement toward a universal religion was
neither steady nor continuous. Yet there were
epochs when 1t seemed as II the whole world
was stirred by a single hope. for example the
sixth century before Christ. which witnessed
the abors Of Confucius and Laotsze in CHINA,
OF Gautama In India. of Jeremiah and Ezekiel
among the Hebrews. and Of the inventors OF the
mysteries in Greece. But the various results lnat
aowed from this simultaneous movement were
not such as to encourage the belief that man
kind would ever reach common ground In re-
lgion DR. Menzes himself appears to hold that
the last eighteen centuries have not counted for
much in religious evolution. In maintaining
Christianity as at first preached. the simplest
and broadest religion ever preached on eartn.
lies in his opinion the hope Of the future OF
mankind.