Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate/Volume 3/Number 6/The Philosophy of Religion
THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION.
[Concluded from our last.]
We have an abundance of ponderous volumes on the subject of moral philosophy; but the different theories which have been proposed and discussed, and the metaphysical mode in which the subject has been generally treated, have seldom led to any beneficial practical results. To attempt to treat the subject of morals without a reference to divine revelation, as most of our celebrated moral writers have done, seems to be little short of egregious trifling.-It cannot serve the purpose of an experiment, to ascertain how far the unassisted faculties of man can go in acquiring a knowledge of the foundation and the rules of moral action; for the prominent principles of Christian morality are so interwoven into the opinions, intercourses and practices of modern civilized society, and so familiar to the mind of every man who has been educated in a Christian land, that it is impossible to eradicate the idea of them from the mind, when it attempts to trace the duties of man, solely on the principles of reason. When the true principles of mortality are once communicated through the medium of revelation, reason can demonstrate their utility, and their conformity to the character of God, to the order of the universe, and to the relations which subsist among intelligent agents. But we are by no means in a situation to determine whether they could ever have been discovered by the investigations and efforts of the unassisted powers of the human mind. The only persons who could fairly try such an experiment were the Greeks and Romans, and other civilized nations, in ancient times, to whom the light of revelation was not imparted. And what was the result of all their researches on this most important of all subjects? What were the practical effects of all the fine-spun theories and subtle speculations which originated in the schools of ancient philosophy, under the tuition of Plato and Socrates, of Aristotle and Zeno? The result is recorded in the annals of history, and in the writings of the apostles. "They became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish hearts were darkened-They were filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, envy, murder deceit, malignity; they were backbiters haters of God, despiteful, proud, inventors of evil things, disobedience to parents, without natural affection, implacable and unmerciful." Their general conduct was characterized by pride, lasciviousness and revenge; they indulged in the commission of unnatural crimes; they were actuated by restless ambition; and they gloried in covering the earth with devastation and carnage.
It is true, indeed, that some of the sects of philosophers propounded several maxims and moral precepts, the propriety of which cannot be questioned; but none of them could agree respecting either the foundation of virtue, or the ultimate object toward which it should be directed, or that in which the chief happiness of man consists; and hence it happened, that the precepts delivered by the teachers of philosophy had little influence on their own conduct, and far less on that of the unthinking multitude. Where do we find, in any of the philosophical schools of Greece and Rome, a recommendation of such precepts as these, "Love your enemies; do good to them who hate you; and pray for them who despitefully use you and persecute you?" In opposition to such divine injunctions, we can trace in the maxims and conduct of the ancient sages, a principle of pride insinuating itself into the train of their most virtuous actions. It has been reckoned by some a wise and a witty answer which one of the philosophers returned to his friend, who had advised him to revenge an injury he had suffered; "What, (says he) if an ass kicks me, must I needs kick him again?"-Some may be disposed to consider such a reply as indicating a manly spirit, and true greatness of soul; but it carries in it a proud and supercilious contempt of human nature, and a haughtiness of mind, which are altogether inconsistent with the mild and benevolent precepts of Him, who, in the midst of his severest sufferings from men, exclaimed, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."
It appears somewhat preposterous to waste our time, and the energies of our minds, in labored metaphysical disquisitions, to ascertain the foundations of virtue, and the motives from which it is to be pursued; whether it consists in utility, in the fitness of things, or in the regulations of states and political associations, and whether it is to be prose- cuted from a principle of self love or of benevolence, when every useful question that can be started on this subject may be immediately solved by a direct application to the revelations of heaven, and an infallible rule derived for the direction of our conduct in all the circumstances and relations in which we may be placed. Even although the moral philosopher were to reject the Bible, as a revelation from God, it would form no reason why its annunciations should be altogether overlooked or rejected. As an impartial investigator of the history of man, of the moral constitution of the human mind, and of the circumstances of our present condition, he is bound to take into view every fact and every circumstance which may have a bearing on the important question which he undertakes to decide. Now, it is a fact, that such a book as the Bible actually exists-that amidst the wreck of thousands of volumes which the stream of time had carried into oblivion, it has survived for several thousands of years-that its announcements have directed the opinions and the conduct of myriads of mankind-that many of the most illustrious characters that have adorned our race have submitted to its dictates, and governed their tempers and their actions by its moral precepts-that those who have been governed by its maxims have been distinguished by uprightness of conduct, and been most earnest and successful in promoting the happiness of mankind-that this book declares, that a moral revulsion has taken place in the constitution of man since he was placed upon this globe-and that the whole train of its moral precepts proceeds on the ground of his being considered as a depraved intelligence.-These are facts which even the infidel philosopher must admit; and instead of throwing them into the shade, or keeping them entirely out of view, he is bound, as an unbiased inquirer, to take them all into account in his researches into the moral economy of the human race. In particular, he is bound to inquire into the probability of the alleged fact of the depravity of man, and to consider, whether the general train of human actions, the leading facts of history in reference to all ages and nations, and the destructive effects of several operations in the system of nature, have not a tendency to corroborate this important point. For the fact, that man is a fallen intelligence, must materially modify every system of ethics that takes it into account. Should this fact be entirely overlooked, and yet ultimately be found to rest on a solid foundation, then, all the speculations and theories of these moralists who profess to be guided solely by the dictates of unassisted reason, may prove to be nothing more than the reveries of a vain imagination, and to be built on "the baseless fabric of a vision."
Thomas Dick.