New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-03-24
FORMULAS ND BELIEFS.
sewage.

The chapter relating TO formulas ana DelleiS
in Mr. Arthur J. Bafours remarkable DOOR,
THE Foundations of Belief Is an acute anal
ysis of a question that, almost more than any
other. Is up for discussion to-day in all the
Churches Conservative theology asserts, hrst,
that the doctrines of Christianity are an I'M
mutablc sacred deposit TO be handed down III
formulas from generation to gcneraton aiu'
second that all, Of every age and race, VINO ac-
cent these formulas must Of necessity believe
the same thing.
Mr. Ralfour disscnts from both these PROPOSE
tions: and his dissent is all the more worthy OF
notice because the whole argument or his DOCK
is against matcrialism and in support OF Chris
tianity, which, he says, is "a development OF
Thcism now more necessary than ever lie
shows that the explanatory formulas or all
crcads i'm which men cndeavor to cnshrine tle
trnth are continually being shattered and IN
some new shape made over again. The history
f Thought Is an accumulation Of abandoned cX-
nlanations. a vast cemetery, in which every
tbrust of the shovel turns up some bone that
o,ca formed part Of living theory. ms Is
csnccially true of theology, because of the rage
r., doGninr which characterizcs ii. If the mys-
tories which IT thus strives to describe IN woras
,o too narrow for mans spiritual needs. There
f,ro II follows that christianity Is constantly
1isc,rdiur It's old formulas not because II
doubr.. but because it believes more hrmiy 'h'''
or,r the truths which these formulas so I'M
perfectly express
p,,, ovcn If formulas were immutablc. II does
not follow that all those who accept them I'M
d.rstond them 10 mean the same thing IL oI'eh
ia, 81. shn
49, marc than the mould into which each age
and race pours The content OF lis OWN '"ou0n'
min, The mystery defined. Philosophical
IL spcakinc no human language can "Hi! On
,,r... bolicf. and no human belief is more than
!, crude and clumsy carlcaiure "i 'e I'"''!
,.,tnd f., The assumption of formal logic and
common usage that words have hN'u NJ"
inc * merely convenient hctloh' ""' ""
s.,ion has been built the whole suP''H"
- ,r.di,rval theology. No TWO lrl'F'' ~ =!
,,thoii, tastes see exactly the Same INNS -,
,b,y look upon a landscape. HOW INV" "
I ,..fblr for the definitions OF th'"o-!' '"
- science. 10 produce in all men P,'
tl.,ti,v ~ belief 80 Of the relation "i "''''
g.. IN, reality behind It. and there l. aI""FS =
,.,iitv h.hind every belief. however cru"'' '"'
I. - abstract selfevidcnt propositions 'h''e
A. -, h,li.f which Is more than an approAlih'.
49,, -, ,ncthod which Is free from nav anu
49,. ,..,,lt which Is not tainted with error II
N chi. IL. tr,ic II follows that the men, whether
T., ,h, domain II religion or science VINO cia'''
,..rfec,iop and immutability for the ioF'h"'nS
-. which they express their conception Oh r'''"'
~. .,regiously In error. Their forlhuias "''
,,, words thrown at mystery ~ Ma''"'"
Arnold happily put it, They express no "'''
,b,u , dim consciousness that there II s"In'
,,ip, bcvond the reach Of definition "hioH'
| h..,.cr il is both necessary and wise 10 re''u'e
>, Same dcnnitive formula, however Imperfect
| il may be-. a.,
Does this seem To- some To open UP W. ""''
,,,,cs of d,spalr? TO Mr Balfour. on Tie o'l'''
! hand il seems 10 furnish the irucSt lou"""',''
! - f,ith What Kind Of universe, ne "sNS'
| .,,.,,ld that be which we could understand; IL
81, were ineligible by MS, would 1t be- creolp'c
"If orr reason could comprehend H. "ouin II
.ro, be too narrow for our needs! ! ptlc''
..,ecaus. If Is impossible. may he a piouS para
.Iv 4 disbclicyc because 1t Is simple coil
| .,,..nds itself 10 lee as an axiom. !" 'h' nl'
,,.h, Identifies religion with IFS torhuiaS 'hi'
train of thought may seem destructive OF IT.
r,ior Rut in reality 1t rcscues all that Is III
| .ri.h,hlc i'm Il from the destruction 'hat s""h'i
/ ~, I,tcr must ovcrtakc all its explanatory LOT
/