The sun., 1904-08-21
vi.

This seems to be the place to glance at
| the question whether Hobbies deserv ed
| to be taxed with atheism. That to his Eng
lish contemp oraries he was the typical
| atheist there is no doubt. Atheism
was a name bestowed upon a phase Of
sentiment common enough at the court
of Charles H.. as. according to Father
Mersenne, it had been in Paris. Mersenne
indeed, had ed that in the fifth decade
Of the seventeenth century there were some
fifty thousand atheists in Paris alone
and that twelve might often be found in
one house In the generation following
his death Hobbies ceased to be the butt
of orthodox controversialists, who preferred
to shoot at Toland and Collins Warburton
could speak Of him with certain admira-
ton, and Dryden, before his conversion to
Catholicism, seems to have sympathized
with Hobbes's hatred ofpriestcraft. Hobbies
himself steadily denied that the name
atheist" was properly applied to him.
He called himself not only theist but a
faithful Christian, and even a member of
the Church Of England. Some of his critics
have accepted his assurances so far as to
concede that he only meant to reject scholas-
tic dogmas, or demonstrations, and did not
get beyond what is vaguely called Socin-
ianism, or, perhaps -unsectarian Christian
ity." Sir Leslie Stephen does not go so
far. He submits that the first and most
important question is what "Hobbesism"
means, whether Hobbies meant it or not.
When we have answered that question
We can draw such inferences as seem reason
able concerning the opinions which Hobbies
personally held. 1t should require no
argument to convince us that Hobbesism,
like other materialistc systems. is incom-
patible with anything that can be called
4theism.r Hobbes's argument comes merely
to this, that, il the world was created-a
point which he admits to be doubtful
the Creator must have been a being of
stupendous power, but one OF whom we
are unable to say anything else This,
1t will be remembered. was precisely the
position tax en- by Dean Mansel in his Limits
OF Religious Thought" Hobbes's doctrine
that the Creator is "corporeal, or an in
finitely Subtle" matter occupying space.
is fairly described by Sir Leslie Stephen
as simply quaint attempt to evadc the
more natural inference that He is outside
Of all movable relations. 4 religion of
this kind is not likely to give much trouble
to anybody. and it is not surp rising tina;
tloppcS Ioleiiiicd' oIpoHeTlS knOuld have
regarded him as virtually opposed to all
possible theology. What Hobbies himself
thought whether. in other words. he went
to the lengths to which logically Hobbies
list would go-is a different qu estion, which
the present biographer does not under
take to decide. 1t is admitted that there
Is presumption that no bold a thinker
must have seen the p lain infcrcnces from
his principles. Even il he did not see them
for himself. they were pointed out by an.
tag onists; and, although Hobbies was ant |
to think that antagonism means misrep- |
he could scarcely fail TO per /
ceve that in his case the critics had some |
ground for their comments. His answers. |
indeed. seem less to meet hostile arcu- |
ments than to be ingenious devices for
shrking the question Hobbies certainly
made his reserves, but the blame for the
reservations belongs more to the persecu-
tors than TO the persecuted.
Sir Leslie Stephen also points out that,
N his political writings, Hobbies relies