THE PHILOSOPHIC VIEWS OF JAMES 0RR

Citation preview

INFORMATION TO USERS

This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of th e original docum ent. While th e m ost advanced technological m eans to photograph and reproduce this d ocum ent have been used, th e quality is heavily dependent upon th e quality of th e original subm itted. T he following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand m arkings o r patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.

The sign or "ta rg e t" fo r pages apparently lacking from th e docum ent photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting th ru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you com plete continuity.

2.

When an image on th e film is obliterated w ith a large round black mark, it is an indication th a t th e photographer suspected th a t the copy may have moved during exposure and th u s cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of th e page in the adjacent frame.

3.

When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of th e material being p h o to g ra p h e d th e photographer follow ed a definite m ethod in "sectioning" th e material. It is custom ary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below th e first row and continuing on until com plete.

4.

T he m ajority of users indicate th a t the textual co n ten t is of greatest value, however, a som ew hat higher quality reproduction could be m ade from "photographs" if essential to th e understanding o f the dissertation. Silver prints o f "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing th e Order D epartm ent, giving th e catalog num ber, title, au th o r and specific pages you wish reproduced.

University Microfilms 300 North Z eeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 A Xerox E ducation Company

13~866fe

ID3907 ,2 3 Van Wyk, H erbert 3 . 1342 The p h i l o s o p h i c v iew s o f Jar.es O r r . .. . V3 New York, 1941. a v i , c l 3,2 S 6 t y p e w r i t t e n l e a v e s . p o r t . 29 cm. | T h e s is (r’h .D . ) - New1 York x i n i v e r s i t y , S c h o o l o f e d u c a t i o n , 1942. B ib lio g r a p h y ; p , c 2 7 5 3-2 S 6 . A78252

Xerox University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.

o o i Th9sis accepted

If

Data J ,EC 1 3 1941

THE PHILOSOPHIC VIEWS OF JAMES ORE

HERBERT S. VAN WYK

Subm itted in p a r t i a l f u lf illm e n t o f the req u irem en ts f o r th e degree o f D octor o f P hilosophy in th e School o f E ducation o f • New York U n iv e rs ity

1941

PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company

General Editor, International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia

"He was a g r e a t g i f t o f God. to th e Church i n a p rep le x ed and anxious tim e, and many w ill be in s p ir e d as lo n g as they l i v e by th e memory o f h is la b o rio u s , magnanimous and tr u ly C h r is tia n f a i t h . " - James Denney "He was a g r e a t le a d e r and te a c h e r, a g re a t th in k e r and w r i te r , a g r e a t sc h o la r and d e b a te r, b u t he was a ls o a g re a t and noble C h ris tia n man." - L ouis Matthews Sweet

TABLE OP CONTENTS

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1

I . The Statem ent o f th e S u b je c t.

1

I I . The J u s t i f i c a t i o n o f th e T h e sis.

2

I I I . The A v ailab le Source M a te r ia ls .

3

IV. The P lan o f T reatm ent.

5 PART I

CHAPTER I I THE LIFE OF JAMES GRR

7

I . B ir th and Youth.

3

I I . E ducatio n .

9

I I I . P a s to ra te a t Hawick.

10

IV . P ro fe s s o ra te s a t Edinburgh and Glasgow.

13

A. O r r 's A c ti v itie s R e fle c te d in His Books.

14

B. O r r 's A c ti v itie s as a L e c tu re r.

16

C. O r r 's A c ti v itie s as an E d ito r .

18

D. O r r 's A c ti v itie s in B eh alf o f Church Union.

19

E. O r r 's P a r t in R e lig io u s C ontroversy.

20

V. D eath.

21

V I. E stim a te s o f H is L if e , His Work and His P e r s o n a lity . 22 A. An A p p reciatio n by James Denny.

22

6 . An A p p reciatio n by W. R obertson N lo o ll.

25

C. An A p p reciatio n by L ouis Matthews Sweet.

25

D. An A p p reciatio n by W illiam Ewing.

27

PART I I THE TIMES IN WHICH ORR LIVED

28

GHAPTER I I I THE SCOTTISH SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY

29

I . Thomas Reid.

29

I I . Dugald S tew art.

30

I I I . Thomas Brown.

31

IV . W illiam Ham ilton.

31

V. Henry L. M ansel.

33

V I. The D ecline o f th e S c o ttis h School.

34

V II. The R e la tio n o f James

Orr to th e S c o ttis h School.

35

A. O r r 's R e latio n to M ansel.

35

B. O r r 's R e la tio n to R eid.

36

CHAPTER IV THE UTILITARIAN-EMPIRICALSCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY

38

I . Jeremy Bentham.

39

I I . James M ill.

40

I I I . John S tu a rt M ill.

41

A. M i l l 's E th ic s .

42

B. M i l l 's L ogic.

43

C. M i l l 's View o f R e lig io n .

45

iv

IV. A lexander B ain.

46

V. The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e U tilita r ia n - E m p ir ic a l School. 48 A. O r r 's R e la tio n to th e E m p irical Theory o f Knowl­ edge .

49

B. O r r 's R e la tio n to th e U t i l i t a r i a n Theory o f E th ic s .50 CHAPTER V THE EVOLUTIONARY-NATURALIST SCHOCL OF PHILOSOPHY

52

I . C harles Darwin.

52

I I . Darwinism.

54

I I I . H erbert Spencer.

55

A.

Spencer’s D e fin itio n o f E v o lu tio n .

56

B.

S p en ce r's Theory o f Knowledge.

57

C.

S p en ce r's S ociology.

58

D.

S p en ce r's E th ic s .

59

IV. Thomas Henry

H uxley.

59

A. H ux ley 's A gnosticism .

60

B. H ux ley 's E th ic s .

61

V. George Henry Lewes.

62

V I. The Views of E v o lu tio n a ry -N a tu ra lis ts on E th ic s .

63

A. W illiam Klngdon C lif f o r d .

63

B. L e s lie Stephen.

64

V II. The Views o f E v o lu tio n a ry -N a tu ra lis ts on R e lig io n .

66

A.

W illiam Klngdon C liff o r d .

66

B.

C h arles A llen G ran t.

66

C.

W illiam Wlnwood Reade.

67

D. George John Romanes.

67 v

E. James Allen Ploton.

68

F. James C r o ll.

68

G. Henry Drummond.

69

V III. The Views o f E v o lu tio n a ry -N a tu ra lis ts on Sooiology. 69 A. Benjamin Kidd.

69

IX . The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e E v o lu tio n ary -N at­ u r a l i s t School.

71

A. Orr*s View o f

th e

F acts o f E v o lu tio n .

71

B. Orr*s View o f

th e

Methodo f E v o lu tio n .

71

1 . O r r 's C ritic is m o f D arw in's View. 2. O r r 's R evised Conception o f E v o lu tio n . a . The In n e r Power o f Development o f Organisms. b . The Rate o f P ro d u ctio n of New S p ecies. c . The E x iste n c e o f Kingdoms i n N atu re. d . E v o lu tio n In v o lv es a beginning in Time. e . E v o lu tio n and Theism n o t N e c e ssa rily Antag­ o n is tic .

72 73 73 74 75 76 77

CHAPTER VI THE- NEO-IDEALIST SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY

78

I . James F. F e r r le r .

80

I I . Benjamin Jo w e tt.

31

I I I . James H utchison S t i r l i n g .

81

IV . Thomas H ill G reen.

82

A. G reen 's M etaphysics.

83

B. G reen 's E th ic s .

84

V. Edward C aird .

85

A. C a ir d 's D e fin itio n o f Development.

36

B. C a ir d 's Conception o f th e A b so lu te.

87

C. C a ir d 's P hilosophy o f R e lig io n .

87

vl

V I. John O alrd.

88

V II. W illiam W allace.

89

V II I . Henry Jo n ea.

89

IX . F ra n c is H erbert B rad ley .

99

X. B ernard B osanquet.

91

X I. John McTaggart E l l i s McTaggart.

92

X II. The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e N e o -Id e a lis t Move­ ment.

93

A. The R e la tio n o f James O rr to th e Sources o f th e N e o -Id e a lis t Movement. 1 . O rr’s 2 . O rr 's

R e la tio n to K ant. R e la tio n to H egel.

B. The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e B r i t i s h NewId e a lls t. 1. 2. 3. 4.

O rr's O rr’s O rr 's O rr’ s

R e la tio n R e la tio n R e la tio n R e la tio n

to to to to

Green. O alrd . B rad ley . McTaggart.

94 94 97 98 98 100 101 102

CHAPTER V II THE RITSCHLIAN THEOLOGY

104

I . The R lts o h lia n S chool.

104

I I . The R its c h lia n Theory o f Knowledge,

105

I I I . The R its c h lia n Theory o f R e lig io n .

106

IV. The R its c h lia n Id e a o f th e Kingdom o f God.

107

V. The R its c h lia n D o ctrin e o f Sin and Redemption.

109

V I. The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e R its c h lia n Theology. 110 A. O r r 's E stim ate o f th e M e rits o f R its c h lla n ls m .

110

B. O r r 's C ritic is m o f th e R its c h lia n Theory o f Knowledge.

Ill

v li

C. O r r 's C ritic is m o f th e R its c h lia n Theory o f Re­ lig io n .

112

D. O r r 's C ritic is m o f th e R its c h lia n Id e a o f th e King­ dom o f Cod. 112 E. O r r 's C ritic is m o f th e R its c h lia n D o ctrin e o f Sin and Redemption.

112

CHAPTER V III BIBLICAL CRITICISM

115

I . The O rig in o f B ib lic a l C ritic is m .

115

I I . D e f in itio n s .

116

I I I . Modern Old Testam ent C ritic is m .

117

A.

Johann G o ttf rie d E ichhorn.

117

B.

Wilhelm M artin L eberecht De W ette.

117

C.

George H ein ric h August Von Ewald.

118

D. Johann K arl Wilhelm V atke.

118

E.

K arl H ein rich G raf.

119

F.

Abraham Kuenen.

120

G. J u li u s W ellhausen.

120

IV. The R e la tio n o f O rr to Modern Old Testam ent C r itic is m .120 A. O r r 's View o f th e E ff e c ts o f Old Testam ent C r i t l oism .

121

B. O r r 's E v alu a tio n o f Old Testam ent C ritic is m .

122

V. Modern New Testam ent C ritic is m .

123

A. G otthold Ephraim L essin g .

123

B. David F rie d ric h S tra u s ? .

123

C. Ferdinand C h r is tia n B aur.

124

VI. The R e la tio n o f O rr to Modern New Testament C r itic is m .125 viii

CHAPTER IX SUMMARY OP PART TWO

127

I . The R e la tio n o f th e S c o ttis h Philosophy o f Common Sense to th e Trends o f th e Times.

127

I I . The R e la tio n of U tlllta rla n -E m p lrlc ls m to th e Trends o f th e Times.

128

I I I . The R e la tio n o f E v o lu tio n ary -N atu ralism to th e Trends o f th e Times.

128

IV. The R e la tio n o f N eo-Idealism to th e Trends o f the Times.

130

V. The R e la tio n o f th e R its c h lia n Theology to th e Trends o f th e Times.

131

VI. The R e la tio n of B ib lic a l C ritic is m to th e Trends o f th e Times.

132

V II. The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e Trends o f th e Tim es.132 PART I I I THE SOURCES OP ORR'S IDEAS

135

CHAPTER X THE SOURCES OP ORR'S IDEAS IN PHILOSOPHY

136

I . K a n t's Views as a Source o f O r r 's I d e a s .

136

I I . H e g e l's Views as a Source o f O r r 's Id e a s .

139

I I I . S t i r l i n g 's Views as a Source o f O rr 's I d e a s .

140

IV. G re en 's Views as a Source o f O r r 's Id e a s .

140

V. Edward C a ird 's Views as a Source o f O rr's Id e a s .

141

VI. Andrew S e th 's Views as a Source o f O r r 's Id e a s .

142

V II. R e id 's Views as a Source o f O rr 's I d e a s .

145

V III. O t t o 's Views as a Source o f O r r 's I d e a s .

144

IX. Thomson's Views a s a Source o f O r r 's Id e a s .

145

ix

CHAPTER XI THE SOURCES OP ORR'S IDEAS IN THEOLOGY. I . O r r 's View o f T h eo lo g ical Dogma. A. Dogma D efined. B. The C r i t e r i a o f Dogma. 1 . The U ltim ate T e st. 2. Secondary C r i t e r i a . 3 . An O b jectiv e C r ite rio n . C. The

E v o lu tio n o f Dogma.

D. TheS t a b i l i t y o f Dogma. I I . T h eo lo g ical Dogma as a Source o f O rr's I d e a s . A. The B ib le as a Source o f O r r 's Id e a s . B. Second Century A p o lo g ists as a Source o f O rr's Id eas. C. TheNlcene Theology as a Source of O r r 's Id e a s . D. The A ugustinian Theology as a Source o f O rr's Id eas. E. The C h r ls to lo g ic a l C o n tro v e rsies as a Source of O r r 's Id e a s . P. Sources of O r r 's D octrine o f th e Atonement. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Sources b e fo re Anselm. Anselm. A belard Bernard Aquinas The Reformers

G. The R eform ation Theology a s a Source o f O rr's Id eas. H. P ost-R eform ation Theology as a Source o f O rr's Id eas. I . N in eteen th C entury Theology as a Source o f O r r 's Id e a s .

CHAPTER XII SUMMARY OP PART I I I I . Sources o f O rr’s Id e a s in P hilo so p h y .

165 165

A. German Id e a lism .

165

B. N eo-H egelianism .

165

C. Theism.

166

D. R ealism .

166

E. P hilosophy o f E v o lu tio n .

166

I I . Sources o f O rr’s Id e a s in Theology.

166

A. The D octrine o f th e T r i n ity .

166

B. The D o ctrin es o f Man and S in .

167

C. The D octrine o f th e Person o f C h r is t.

167

D. The D octrine o f th e Atonement.

167

E. The D octrine o f th e A p p lic atio n o f Redemption.

168

PART IV ORR'S WORLD-VIEW CHAPTER X III ORR’S VIEW OF THE WORLD INGENERAL I . O rr’ s C la s s if ic a tio n o f W orld-view s.

170 170

A. The S c ie n tif ic .

170

B. The P h ilo s o p h ic a l.

170

C. The R e lig io u s.

171

D. T h e ir In terd ep en d en ce.

171

I I . O r r 's D e fin itio n o f H is Own W orld-view. A. Theism In v o lv e s a S u p ern atu ral View o f th e World. xi

172 172

B. Theism In v o lv es a B e lie f In R e v e la tio n .

173

C. Theism In v o lv es a B e lie f i n th e I n c a rn a tio n .

173

D. Complete Theism.

174

I I I . The R e la tio n o f O r r 's World-view to O ther Worldt h e o r le s .

174

IV . O r r 's Sketch o f th e C h r is tia n View.

176

CHAPTER XIV THE PHILOSOPHIC BASIS OP ORR'S WORLD-VIEW I . The E p lstem o lo g ical B a sis o f O r r 's W orld-view.

178 178

A. P i r s t P rin c ip le s o f Knowledge.

178

B. The N ature o f T ru th .

179

C. The T ests o f T ru th .

180

I I . The O n to lo g ical B a sis o f O r r 's World-view.

180

I I I . The M etaphysical B a sis o f O r r 's W orld-view.

181

A. S u p ern atu ralism .

182

B. P urpose.

182

0 . C au satio n .

182

D. Preedom.

183 CHAPTER XV

THE PIRST POSTULATE OP ORR'S WORLD-VIEW: THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. I . P o in ts o f General Agreement.

185 185

A. Monotheism Alone T enable.

185

B. The Power whioh Works in th e U niverse th e Source o f a R a tio n a l O rder.

186

C. The Power which Works i n th e U niverse th e Source o f a Moral O rder.

186

x ll

I I . The T h eo retic P ro o fs f o r th e E x iste n ce o f God.

187

A. The Cosmological Argument.

188

B. The T e le o lo g lc a l Argument.

188

C. The O n to lo g ical Argument.

190

I I I . The Moral Argument f o r th e E x isten ce o f God.

191

IV . God as a R e lig io u s P o s tu la te .

193

A. The N ature and D e fin itio n of R e lig io n .

193

B. The Demands o f th e R e lig io u s S p i r i t .

194

CHAPTER XVI THE SECOND POSTULATE OP ORR'S WORLD-VIEW: MAN MADE IN THE IMAGE OP GOD. I . The N a tu ra l B a sis - C rea tio n .

196 196

A. Evidences o f a Beginning from th e P rim o rd ia l Elem ents.

197

B.

E vo lu tio n In v o lv es a B eginning in Time.

197

C.

New Stages o f Development Due to C re a tiv e Cause.

198

I I . Man's P lace in C re a tio n .

200

I I I . Man th e B earer o f th e Image o f God.

200

A. His R atio n a l Image.

201

B. His Moral Image.

201

C. His Image In S o v ereig n ty .

202

IV. Man C o n s titu te d f o r Im m o rta lity .

202

A. The S cale o f Man's N ature.

202

B. Man's L ife Viewed as Moral D is c ip lin e .

203

C. The Incom pleteness o f Human L if e .

204

D. The In flu e n c e o f t h i s Hope on Human F a c u ltie s .

204

x ili

CHAPTER XVII THE THIRD POSTULATE OP ORR'S WORLD-VIEW: THE EXISTENCE OP EVIL I . The Problem of Moral E v il.

206 206

A. The N ature o f Moral E v il.

206

1 . Moral E v il as T ran sg ressio n o f Moral Law. 207 2. Moral E v il a C o n tra d ic tio n o f D ivine H o lin e ss. 207 3. Moral E v il a T urning a s id e from th e True Moral End. 208 B. The O rigin o f Moral E v il.

209

I I . The Problem o f N atu ral E v il.

210

I I I . The R e la tio n o f Moral E v il to D eath.

211

CHAPTER XVIII THE CENTRAL ASSERTION OP THE CHRISTIAN VIEW: THE INCARNATION OP GOD IN'CHRIST. I . The Argument from H isto ry .

213 213

A.

The P i r s t A lte rn a tiv e o f H istory#

214

B.

TheSecond A lte r n a tiv e .

215

C.

The T hird A lte r n a tiv e .

216

D.

TheP o u rth A lte r n a tiv e .

217

I I . The Argument from th e P acts o f C h r is tia n ity .

218

A.

The Testimony o f th e A p o sto lic Age.

219

B.

The Testimony o f th e G ospels.

220

I I I . The R e la tio n o f th e C en tral A sse rtio n to th e Three P o s tu la te s .

223

A. The R e la tio n o f th e In c a rn a tio n to th e Concept o f God. 223 1 . The H igher Concept o f God. 2 . God's P lan f o r th e World. x iv

223 224

B. The R e la tio n o f th e In c a rn a tio n to th e Problem o f E v il.

224

C. The R e la tio n o f th e In c a rn a tio n to th e D estiny o f Man.

225

CHAPTER XEX THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OP ORR'S WORLD-VIEW. I . The C hronological Growth o f O r r 's Wox*ld-view.

227 227

A. The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World.

227

B. The Growth o f th e H is to r ic a l Aspect o f O rr 's View.

228

C. The Growth o f th e P h ilo so p h io B a sis o f O r r 's View.

228

D. The Growth o f th e T h eo lo g ical and A p o lo g etic As­ p e c ts o f O r r 's View.

229

I I . The L o g ical Development o f O r r 's W orld-view.

230

A. Development Through Comprehensive T reatm ent.

230

B. Development Through Treatm ent o f P a r t i c u l a r Pro­ blem s.

232

1 . The Problems of Man and S in . 2. The Problem o f th e S u p e rn a tu ra l.

232 233

CHAPTER XX THE EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS

OFORR'SWORLD-VIEW.

236

I . The E d u catio n al Im p lic a tio n s o f O r r 's P i r s t and Seoond P o s tu la te s . 236 I I . The E d u ca tio n al Im p lic a tio n s o f O r r 's T h ird and Cen­ t r a l P o s tu la te s .

237

I I I . The E d u catio n al Im p lic a tio n s from Other A spects o f O r r 's W orld-view.

238

XV

CHAPTER XXI SUMMARY OP PART FOUR: ORR* 8 WORLD-VIEW

240

I . O r r 's World-view in G eneral.

240

II* I t s P h ilo so p h ic a l B a s is .

240

I I I . I t s F i r s t P o s tu la te .

241

IV . I t s Second P o s tu la te .

241

V. I t s T h ird P o s tu la te .

242

V I. I t s C e n tral A s s e rtio n .

242 PART V

CONCLUSION CHAPTER XXII AN ESTIMATE OF ORR'S WORK

244

I . An E stim ate o f O r r 's View o f God and th e World.

244

I I . An E stim ate o f O r r 's View o f th e P ro g ress o f Dogma.

246

I I I . An E stim ate o f O r r 's View o f th e R its c h lia n Theol­ ogy.

247

IV . An E stim ate o f O r r 's View o f B ib lic a l C ritic is m .

249

V. An E stim ate o f O r r 's View o f Human N atu re.

254

V I. An E stim ate o f O r r 's View o f T h eo lo g ical and Apolo­ g e tic Problem s.

255

V II. A F in a l E stim ate o f O rr's In flu e n c e .

257

CHAPTER XXIII AN EVALUATION OF ORR'S VIEWS I . The T est o f C o n sisten cy .

258 258

A. C o n siste n t Development. xvl

258

1 . B asic P r in c ip le s . 2. The F i r s t P o stu la te * 5. The Second P o s tu la te . 4. The T hird P o s tu la te . 5. The C e n tral A s se rtio n .

259 259 260 261 262

B. The C onsistency of th e S ev eral P a r ts .

263

I I . The T est o f Correspondence w ith R e a lity .

266

A. Correspondence w ith th e

F a c ts of

S cie n ce.

266

B. Correspondence w ith th e

F a c ts

o f H is to ry .

268

I I I . The T est of W orkableness.

271

BIBLIOGRAPHY

275

I . Prim ary Sources.

275

A. The Works o f James O rr. B. Reviews and C ritic is m s o f

275 th e Workso f James O rr.

280

I I . Secondary Sources.

284

I I I . B io g ra p h ica l S ources.

285

i

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION P hilosophy I s n ev er more fa s c in a tin g th a n when th e views o f a s in g le In d iv id u a l a re stu d ie d and th e s e rio u s attem p t i s made to u n d erstan d how h i s views were developed and what he co n sid ered to be th e n a tu re o f th e w orld, e x is te n c e , knowledge, man, e v i l, and God. I.

The Statem ent o f th e S u b je c t. The su b je c t o f t h i s th e s is i s : The P h ilo so p h io Views of

James O rr.

James Orr was a S c o ttis h p ro fe s s o r who g ain ed an

in te r n a tio n a l r e p u ta tio n as a w r ite r , l e c t u r e r and ed u cato r In philosoph y and th e o lo g y . James Orr was b o rn I n 1844 and d ie d i n 1913.

H is e d u c a tio n a l

and l i t e r a r y work was alm ost e n t ir e ly i n th e f i e l d s o f p h ilosophy, th e philosophy o f r e lig io n , and th eo lo g y .

He was educated a t th e

U n iv e rs ity of Glasgow and th e T h eo lo g ical H a ll o f th e U n ited P re s­ b y te ria n Church a t Edinburgh.

A fte r seventeen y e a rs i n th e pas­

to r a te he was e le c te d to th e p ro fe s s o rs h ip o f Church H isto ry in th e U nited P re s b y te ria n T h eo lo g ical H a ll.

A fte r nine y e a rs In

th a t c h a ir he was tr a n s f e r r e d to th e p ro fe s s o rs h ip o f A p o lo g etics and S ystem atic Theology In th e U nited Free Church a t Glasgow.

He

co n tin u ed In t h i s p o s itio n u n t i l h is d e a th . James Orr was th e proponent o f a w orld-view which d e a ls w ith

2

many o f th e m ajor problem s of philosophy ana th e philosophy of r e lig io n .*

I t I s t h i s w orld-view which w ill be stu d ie d In t h i s

th e s is . II.

The J u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r th e T h e s is. There i s an ev id e n t need f o r t h i s t h e s i s sin ce i t I s th e

f i r s t extended study th a t has been made o f th e l i f e and work o f James O rr.

The w r i te r has n o t been ab le to d isc o v e r a s in g le

t r e a t i s e devoted to an e v a lu a tio n o f h is l i f e and work.

I t is

Im portant th a t such a trea tm en t should be made a v a ila b le f o r he was a s ig n if ic a n t in te r n a tio n a l f ig u r e . Orr gained an in te r n a tio n a l r e p u ta tio n as a l e c t u r e r , w r ite r and ed u c ato r in p h ilo so p h y and th e o lo g y .1

I n 1891 he was Kerr

L e c tu re r in th e U nited P re s b y te ria n T h eo lo g ical H all in Edinburgh. T his marked th e b eg in n in g o f h is p o p u la rity as a l e c t u r e r . made a t l e a s t fo u r le c tu r e to u rs through th e U nited S ta te s .

He On

one o f th e s e to u rs he le c tu r e d in a t l e a s t te n d if f e r e n t c i t i e s . His I n te r n a tio n a l Im portance a ls o c o n s is te d In p a r t In th e f a c t th a t The Problem o f th e Old Testament re c e iv e d th e B ross Prize** i n 1905 and was l a t e r tr a n s l a te d in to D utch.

His books were r e ­

viewed i n le a d in g th e o lo g ic a l and p h ilo s o p h ic a l Jo u rn als and * "The philosophy o f r e lig i o n , . . . . in v e s tig a te s th e n a tu re o f th e r e lig io u s consciousness and th e v alu e o f i t s pronouncements on human l i f e and m an's r e l a t i o n to th e ground o f th in g s ." Andrew Seth P r ln g l e - P a tti son, Philosophy and P h ilo s o p h ic a l S tu d ie s , E ncyclopaedia B r lta n n lo a . 1 4th E d itio n , V ol. 17, p . 762* 1 . C f. C hapter I I . ** A cash p r iz e awarded each decade by th e T ru ste e s o f Lake F o re st C o lleg e, Lake F o r e s t, I l l i n o i s , f o r th e b e s t book "on th e con­ n e c tio n , r e la tio n and mutual b e a rin g o f any p r a c t ic a l sc ie n c e , o r h is to r y o f o u r ra c e , o r th e f a c t i n any departm ent o f know­ le d g e , w ith and upon th e C h r is tia n r e l i g i o n ."

3

p e r io d ic a ls In S co tlan d , England, Germany, F ran ce, H olland and A m erica.2

He was th e o r ig in a l e d i to r of The I n te r n a tio n a l Stan­

dard B ib le E ncyclopaedia. O rr produced a co n sid e ra b le body o f l i t e r a t u r e .

He wrote

s ix te e n books and c o n trib u te d s in g le c h a p te rs to a t l e a s t s ix o th e r s .

He c o n trib u te d a r t i c l e s to Jo u rn a ls and p e r io d ic a ls In

S cotland, England and th e U nited S ta te s .

He c o n trib u te d to th e

P u lp it Commentary, to H a stin g s ' E ncyclopaedia o f R e lig io n and E th ic s , to H a s tin g s 1 D ic tio n a ry o f th e B ib le , and he c o n trib u te d t h i r t y - s i x m ajor a r t i c l e s and hundreds of s h o r te r ones to The I n te r n a tio n a l S tan d ard B ib le E ncyclopaedia. A nother J u s t i f i c a t i o n o f t h i s th e s is I s th e im portance of th e view point which Orr re p re s e n te d .

The C h ris tia n theism which

he advocated has In flu e n c e d th e thought o f m illio n s o f people throughou t th e w orld f o r c e n tu r ie s .

During th e tim es in which

O rr liv e d i t was su b je c te d to c r iti c is m from a v a r ie ty o f so u rces. Some o f th e o b je c tio n s were p re s e n te d from an e n t ir e ly new p o in t o f view .

O rr's p r e s e n ta tio n o f t h i s o ld w orld-view i s p a r tic u ­

l a r l y s ig n if ic a n t because I t In v o lv es th e c o n f lic t of th e o ld w ith th e new and th e endeavor to v in d ic a te th e o ld on a new b a s is . III.

The A v ailab le M a te ria ls . The source m a te r ia ls In clu d e th e works of James O rr, works

d e a lin g w ith th e tim es i n which he liv e d , and m a te r ia ls o f a d is ­ t i n c t l y b io g ra p h ic a l n a tu r e .3

The prim ary source m a te r ia ls ln -

2 . C f. B ib lio g rap h y . 3 . The a v a ila b le source m a te ria ls a re l i s t e d and c l a s s i f i e d In th e B ib lio g rap h y .

4

elude th e hooka and a r t i c l e s which O rr w ro te, and th e review s of h is hooks which appeared a t th e tim e th ey were p u b lish e d .

His

most im p o rtan t works a re The C h r is tia n View o f God and th e World. The P ro g ress o f Dogma. God's Image i n Man and Sin as a Problem To-day. O ther sources a re hooks o f h is to r y , e s p e c ia lly th e h is to r y o f philosophy and th e philosophy of r e lig i o n , encyclopaedias and o th e r m a te ria ls which d e sc rib e th e tim es in which Orr liv e d . The b io g ra p h ic a l source m a te r ia ls found i n e ig h t l i b r a r i e s 4 i n t h i s cou n try c o n s is t c h ie f ly o f s c a tte r e d re fe re n c e s : such a s occur i n th e p re fa c e s to h is books, an aooount o f h is m inis­ t r y i n th e U nited P re s b y te ria n co n g reg atio n a t E ast Bank, Hawick, a few o b itu a ry n o tic e s , and o c c a sio n a l re f e r e n c e s in th e h is to r y o f th e Church o f S co tlan d . Moreover correspondence w ith th e L ib r a r ia n s of T r i n ity Col­ le g e , Glasgow, and New C ollege, Edinburgh, and w ith th e p u b lis h ­ e rs i n England and th e U nited 8 ta te s brought to l i g h t no ad d i­ tio n a l m a te r ia l.

I n f a c t , Dr. Mackenzie, o f P rin c e to n Theologi­

c a l Seminary, ex p ressed th e o p in io n th a t Orr l e f t a re q u e s t th a t g h is biography should n o t be w r itte n . The method o f secu rin g th e source m a te r ia ls was a s fo llo w s. O r r 's books were l i s t e d i n l i b r a r y in d e x e s.

Some of th e a r t i c l e s

4 . The New York C ity P u b lic L ib ra ry , th e L ib ra ry o f th e New York U n iv e rs ity School o f E ducation, and th e l i b r a r i e s o f th e f o l­ low ing se m in a rie s: The B ib lic a l Seminary i n New York; The G eneral T h eo lo g ical Seminary o f th e P r o te s ta n t E p isco p al Church; and Union T h eo lo g ical Seminary, a l l i n New York C ity; New Brunswick T h eo lo g ical Seminary, New Brunswick New J e rs e y ; P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Seminary, P rin c e to n , New J e rs e y ; Western T heolo g io al Seminary, H olland, M ichigan. 5 . In a c o n v e rsa tio n w ith th e a u th o r.

5

g were l i s t e d i n P e r io d ic a l A r tic le s on R e lig io n . 1890-1899T and some o f th e book review s were l i s t e d in th e Book Review D ig e s t,7 b u t f o r th e most p a r t th e method pursued was to tu r n to th e se p e r io d ic a ls and e i t h e r page through them o r use such Indexes as they contained*

T his proved to be a la b o rio u s b u t f r u i t f u l pro­

c e d u re . IV.

The P lan of T reatm ent. While t h i s t h e s i s d e a ls p rim a rily w ith th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l

views o f James O rr, P a r t One w ill be devoted to a b io g ra p h ic a l sk e tch o f h is l i f e . P a r t Two w ill be a c o n s id e ra tio n o f th e tim es in which Orr liv e d .

The development o f th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l thought o f h is day

and r e la te d movements s p e c ia lly p e r tin e n t to th e views o f O rr, w ill be tra c e d h i s t o r i c a l l y .

The r e la tio n s h ip o f O rr 's thought

to th e s e c u rre n ts o f th o u g h t, w hether of s im ila r it y o r d is s im i­ l a r i t y , agreement o r disagreem ent, w ill be p o in te d out in o rd er to p la c e Orr i n th e p ro p e r p e r s p e c tiv e .

The r e la tio n s h ip w ill

be determ ined through a n a ly s is and com parison. P a r t Three w ill be devoted to tr a c in g th e p robable sources o f O r r 's id e a s in b o th philosophy and th e o lo g y . P a r t Pour w ill be a c o n s id e ra tio n o f th e o u tsta n d in g p o in ts i n O r r 's w orld-view .

The lo g ic a l and h i s t o r i c a l development of

O r r 's tho u g h t w ill be tra c e d in o rd e r to show th e r e la tio n s h ip 6. iP erlod io al A r t ic le s on R e lig io n , Author In d ex , 1890-1899, p p . 577-8. Compiled and e d ite d by E rn e st Cushing R ichardson, C harles S c rib n e r' s Sons, New York. 7 . Book Review D ig e s t. V ols. I I , I I I , V, V I. D e s c rip tiv e n o tes by J u s t ln a L e a v itt W ilson. D igest o f review s by C lare E liz a ­ b e th Fanning. The H. W. W ilson Company, M inneapolis, 1907.

6

Between O r r 's su c cessiv e w ritin g s . I n th e co n clu sio n O r r 's w orld-view w ill he su h je o te d to an a n a ly ti c a l and c r i t i c a l e v a lu a tio n In o rd e r to determ ine whether i t i s c o n s is te n t, w hether i t i s in harmony w ith th e f a c t s , and w hether i t i s w orkable.

PART I

CHAPTER I I THE LIFE OF JAMES ORR I t i s Im possible to p re se n t a d e ta ile d h is to r y o f th e l i f e o f James O rr.

A ll th e d e s ire d In fo rm atio n cannot be secu red .

The few f a c t s which have been g a th e re d to g e th e r were d isco v ered by se a rc h in g a number o f l i b r a r i e s i n th e U n ited S ta te s and thro u g h correspondence w ith th e L ib ra ria n s a t Edinburgh and Glasgow and O rr 's so n s.* * Correspondence w ith th e Rev. P ro fe s s o r G. H. C. th e th e o lo g ic a l f a c u lty a t Glasgow brought th e sponse from R obert M. Buchanan, L ib r a r ia n , who T r in ity C ollege, (Church of S c o tla n d ), Lyndoch gow, J a n . 6 th , 1937.

Macgregor of fo llo w in g re ­ w rote from P la c e , Glas­

"There i s n o t much th a t I can f in d out about him p e rs o n a lly . I have looked up an o b itu a ry n o tic e o f him i n th e November is s u e o f th e 'M issio n ary Record o f th e U nited F ree Church o f S c o tla n d ' f o r 1913, and I am d isa p p o in te d to see th a t i t i s sh o rt and In ad eq u ate: i t i s not w ritte n by a w ell known man. I th in k th e re should be a l o t o f o b itu a ry n o tic e s in v a rio u s review s a t th e tim e - th e 'E x p o s ito r' would have one s u re ly , and th e 'E x p o sito ry T im e s'". Mr. Buchanan a ls o gave me th e fo llo w in g In fo rm a tio n . "He has one son who i s a m edical d o cto r i n South Andrews a n o te to D r. James O rr, South Andrews, would f in d him; and a n o th e r i s a m issio n ary in I n d ia - Rev. W. G. O rr, B. D ., J a ip u r , R ajp u tan a. E ith e r o f th e se couid t e l l you where th e b e s t n o tic e s o f h is f a th e r appeared; I th in k th e l a t t e r would be th e more c e r ta in . Yours s in c e r e ly , R obert M. Buchanan, (L ib ra ria n ) * I w rote to b o th sons and i n d ir e c tly re c e iv e d a re p ly from (c o n tin u e d on n ex t page)

8

I.

B ir th and Youth. No Inform ation concerning O r r 's a n c e stry has been d isc o v ered .

I t must even be assumed th a t th ey were S cotch.

We a re In d eb ted

to th e Rev. Stew art R. S co tt f o r what l i t t l e In fo rm atio n we have concerning th e b i r t h and childhood of O rr. (co n tin u e d from p re v io u s page) th e Rev. W. G. O rr, th e m issio n ary , who was home on fu rlo u g h , through correspondence w ith th e Rev. Dr. A. M itc h e ll H unter, L ib r a r ia n a t New C o lleg e, Edinburgh. I quote from h is l e t t e r , d ated Feb. 26, 1937. * . . . . a son o f P ro f. O rr has re c e n tly a r r iv e d home from th e m ission f i e l d and I g o t In touch w ith him a t once. I en clo se h is r e p ly . I t i s J u s t what I should have answered m y self. You m ight w rite to th e s e s s lo n - c le rk o f th e church m entioned to see I f a sp are copy o f th e b o o k le t I s s t i l l a v a ila b le , o r b e t t e r s t i l l to th e a u th o r, c a re o f th e pub­ lis h e r ." T his i s what th e son w rote. "I am so rry I am n o t aware o f any such b io g ra p h ic a l m a te ria l as your correspondent d e s ir e s bein g a v a ila b le . D r. Orr d ied on 6 th September 1913, and th e newspapers and p e r io d ic a ls o f about th a t d a te d o u b tle s s ly co n tain ed some acco u n ts of h is l i f e . Some b io g ra p h ic a l n o te s a re given in a T e r-J u b ile e volume in co n n ectio n w ith E a st Bank Church, Hawick, p u b lish ed 1923, b u t I have an im p ressio n th a t th e book i s no lo n g e r In p r i n t . The t i t l e I s : E ast Bank Church, Hawick, I t s O rigin and H isto ry , 1773-1923, by Rev. Stew art R. S c o tt, M. W., (James Edgar, Hawick). I am so rry n o t to be a b le to supply f u r th e r in fo rm a tio n . With k in d re g a rd s , Yours s in c e r e ly , W. G. O rr. Correspondence w ith Mr. James Edgar bro u g h t a re p ly from him a t Hllm ount, Hawick, S ootland, 7 th A p ril, 1937. He s a id i n p a r t: "I was th e p u b lis h e r o f th e book on E ast Bank Church b u t i t was so ld out Im m ediately, and i t I s now d i f f i c u l t to p ic k up a copy. I have w ritte n out a l l th e re fe re n c e Mr. S c o tt makes to D r. Orr and t r u s t th e same may be o f use to you. Yours s in c e r e ly , James Edgar. That I s e x a c tly what Mr. Edgar d id ! He copied out s ix c lo s e ly w ritte n pages by; hand and se n t them to me.

9

"James Orr was 'born in Glasgow on 1 1th A p ril, 1844. In h is "boyhood he l o s t b oth f a th e r and mother and grew up under th e c a re o f f r ie n d s . The home o f h is youth sto o d i n th e shadow o f p o v erty and th e orphan had soon to s te p in to th e world to earn h is l i v i n g . His e a r l i e s t acq u ain tan ce w ith boohs began as a b in d e r of them, to which tr a d e he was a p p re n tic e d ; b u t h is le a n in g toward study re v e a le d h is r e a l d e s tin y , and a wise f r ie n d suggested t h a t he should make an e f f o r t to clim b th e e d u c a tio n a l la d d e r ." 1 S c o tt t e l l s us th a t he was p o ssessed o f a pow erful physique. A pparently he was g i f t e d w ith a s tro n g body and g e n e ra lly enjoyed good h e a lth f o r n o t a sin g le re fe re n c e to a p e rio d o f i l l n e s s has been d isc o v e re d .

That h is h e a lth was g e n e ra lly good may a ls o be

in f e r r e d from sta tem en ts such a s , "A ll h is l i f e Dr. O rr was a 2 la b o rio u s w orker, . . . ." and, "Dr* Orr was a man o f e x tra ­ o rd in a ry a tta in m e n ts , and h is h a b it o f l i f e was a l l th ro u g h th a t o f c e a s e le s s labour".® When he grew to m a tu rity he had th e s ta tu r e o f a g ia n t and H u n te r's l e t t e r c o n ta in s an I n te r e s t in g item about O r r 's g re a t s iz e .

"I was n o t one o f h is s tu d e n ts b u t remember him w e ll.

He

was a b lg ly - b u ll t man and was lik e w is e somewhat ponderous in h is m e n ta lity , which suggested to some c r i t i c th e nickname 'th e th e o lo g ic a l C ly d esd ale' (A C lydesdale i s one o f our p r iz e d c a r t h o rse s o f la rg e p ro p o rtio n s and heavy w e ig h t.)* ^ II.

E ducation. As f a r as i s known from a v a ila b le re c o rd s , O rr re c e iv e d h is

form al education in Glasgow and Edinburgh.

I t i s assumed th a t he

1 . Stew art R. S c o tt, E ast Bank Church, Hawick: I t s O rig in and H is to ry . 2 . J&mes Denny, The L ate P ro fe ss o r O rr, The B r i t i s h Weekly, S ep t. 11, 1913, p . 576. 3 . W. R obertson N lc o ll, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr, i b i d , p . 567. 4 . A; M. H unter, l e t t e r to H. S. Van W5rk, Feb. 26, 1937.

10

re c e iv e d h is elem entary education in Glasgow, th e c i t y o f h i s b i r t h , and l a t e r he a tte n d e d th e U n iv e rs ity o f Glasgow and th e . T heo lo g ical H all o f th e U nited P re s b y te ria n Church i n Edinburgh. At th e U n iv e rsity of Glasgow he became a d is tin g u is h e d p u p il of Edward C aird , th e P ro fe s s o r of Moral P hilosophy, and g rad u ated w ith f i r s t c la s s honors in th e departm ent. 5 Mr. S co tt makes t h i s in t e r e s t i n g comment on O r r 's c a re e r as a s tu d e n t. "P ossessed o f a marvelous memory, a tremendous c a p a c ity f o r h a rd work and a pow erful p hysique, he was w ell equipped to ca rv e out a su c c e s s fu l c a re e r f o r h im se lf in th e w orld of le a r n in g . D uring h is tim e a t th e U n iv e rsity p r iz e s dropped i n to h is hands l i k e r ip e plum s, and when he l e f t th e D ivin­ i t y H a ll he was expected to loom la r g e ly on th e Church*s thou g h t and p o lic y in th e y e a rs to come."® III.

P a s to ra te a t Hawiok. The sevehteen y e a rs which he spent as th e p a s to r o f th e

E ast Bank Church, Hawick, i s th e only p e rio d concerning which we have anything which might be c a lle d d e ta ile d in fo rm a tio n . At th e age of tw en ty -n in e , James Orr was ordained a t E ast Bank on February 3 rd , 1874, a s th e f i f t h m in is te r .

The member­

ship o f th e E ast Bank Church a t t h a t tim e was f iv e hundred tw enty, 7 and th e stip e n d f o r th e young p a s to r was th re e hundred pounds. At th e tim e he ac c e p te d th e c a l l to E a st Bank he was a ls o c a lle d to R edcar, a new fo rm atio n on th e c o a st o f Y o rk sh ire . Because th e re a r e so few re fe re n c e s to th e l i f e and experience o f James Orr a t o th e r p e rio d s o f h is l i f e , i t has been deemed ad 5 . The London Times. Monday, S e p t. 8 , 1913, p . 9, c o l. c . 6 . S c o tt, op. o l t . 7 . C f. R obert Sm all, H isto ry o f th e C ongregations o f th e U nited P re s b y te ria n Church from 1733 to 1900, V ol. I I , p . 459.

s

11

v ls a b le "to give as d e ta ile d a p ic tu r e of h is m in istry a t Hawlcl£ as I s p o s s ib le .

For th e se d e t a i l s we are in d e b te d to th e h is to ry

o f th e E a st Bank co n g reg atio n w r itte n by th e Rev. S tew art R. S c o tt, which was so f a i t h f u l l y copied by Mr. Edgar. I t was only n a tu r a l th a t a man o f such sh in in g g i f t s should make a deep Im pression on h is f i r s t and o nly charge. For more th an seventeen y e a rs he d ir e c te d th e a c t i v i t i e s o f E a st Bank and le d th e co n g reg a tio n from s tre n g th to s tre n g th . However la v is h ly n a tu re may endow a p erso n , she n ev e r bestow s a l l h er r ic h e s on one in d iv id u a l, b u t h o ld s h e r hand somewhere. Dr. O r r 's work, w hether in the p u lp it o r w ith th e pen, was, lik e h im s e lf, b u i l t on m assive l i n e s , b u t h is g en iu s was p h ilo s o p h ic , n o t p ro p h e tic . He could n o t be sa id to have had th e g i f t of th e winged word o r of th e glowing im a g in a tio n th a t s e ts tr u th aflam e. He was e s s e n ti a ll y an in s t r u c to r - an im p ressiv e in ­ s t r u c t o r - in th e o ra c le s o f God. One could always be sure t h a t h is sermons would be s tro n g meat, n o t m ilk f o r b abes, and s t i l l l e s s , whipped cream f o r th e d ain ty p a l a te . Sunday a f t e r Sunday he gave to th e co n g reg atio n th e teem ing w ealth o f h is com prehensive mind, h an d lin g th e g re a t C h r is tia n d o c trin e s w ith an easy m astery and supplying h is peo p le w ith a reasoned fa ith . Under h is s o lid and in s t r u c tiv e m in istry th e steady growth of th e co n g reg atio n was accompanied by a r i s i n g tid e o f enthu­ siasm . The q u e s tio n o f church expansion which had been long d is c u s s e d , now p re s s e d f o r s o lu tio n . At a m eeting of th e o f f ic e - b e a r e r s th e opinion was expressed 't h a t th e church should be made com fortable and commodious in s id e and as l i t t l e expense as p o s s ib le o u ts id e , i n th e way o f o rn a m e n ta tio n '. I t cannot be doubted th a t t h i s id e a l has been f u l f i l l e d . A fte r v a rio u s su g g e stio n s had been co n sid ered , th e f i n a l r e ­ s o lu tio n was to add two w ings. F lan s were subm itted and p a ss­ ed in to th e tra d e sm e n 's hands. In 1877, th e en larg ed church was opened a t th e c o s t of L1970.* D uring th e same y e a r Mr. O rr, as he then was, was c a lle d to Tay S quare, Dundee, and, a s he re fu se d to le a v e Hawick, th e co n g reg atio n r a is e d h is s tip e n d to L350. There i s a h e ro ic q u a lity in th e congrega­ t i o n 's e n te r p ris e a t t h i s tim e. Although burdened w ith d eb t, th ey d id n o t h e s i t a t e to make an u n su c c e ssfu l b id f o r th e o ld manse, and s e t about o v erh au lin g th e p re s e n t manse, b reak in g out o r i e l windows, and b u ild in g an a d d itio n to i t . The t o t a l c o s t o f th e manse improvements was L450, which sum was alm ost wiped o f f in one g r e a t e f f o r t . At th e a n n iv e rsa ry s e rv ic e s i n February 1884, th e c o lle c tio n o f th e day amounted to L402 * A ccording to R obert Small in H isto ry o f th e Congregation o f th e P re s b y te ria n Church from 1733 to 1900, V ol. I I , p . 459, th e amount was il9 7 4 , "Of which sum a g r e a t p a r t had been p re ­ v io u sly su b sc rib e d ".

12

3 - 1 0 i, which marks th e sp le n d id f lo o d - tld e o f congrega­ t i o n a l o f f e r in g s . Another improvement b elonging to t h i s tim e was th e d em o litio n of th e o ld M eeting-house and th e e r e c tio n o f th e p re s e n t e n tra n c e . Much might be w r itte n about Dr. O r r 's p u b lic a c t i v i t i e s d id space perm it I t . He was to o b ig a man and h is i n t e r e s t s were too v a rie d to be co n fin ed w ith in th e lim ite d c i r c l e of c o n g re g a tio n a l l i f e . E ducation claim ed h is a t te n t io n and caused him to become b o th member and chairm an of th e School Board, where he p lay ed h is p a r t i n many a h o t d is p u te , whose echoes used to r in g b r is k ly afte rw ard s in th e columns o f th e lo c a l P re s s . We a ls o c a tc h s ig h t of him b efo re th e L icen sin g Court arg u in g f o r a re d u c tio n o f lic e n s e s , on th e p o l i t i c a l p la tfo rm p ro claim in g h is s o c ia l c o n v ic tio n s , and on a lo r r y , w ith a breeze fan n in g h is d is o rd e re d h a i r , s tr iv in g to r id e th e w hirlw ind o f e le c tio n p a s s io n s . One who took such a prom inent p a r t i n c iv ic l i f e co u ld not hope to escape c r i t i ­ cism; b u t even h is b i t t e r e s t opponent co u ld not deny h is d i a l e c t i c s k i l l n o r d isp u te h is f e a r le s s i n t e g r i t y . In- s p ite of th e s e fo ra y s and ex cu rsio n s in to o th e r sp h e re s, he rem ained a t h e a r t th e stu d e n t whose n a tiv e a i r i s th e q u ie t stu d y . There surrounded by In c re a s in g rows o f books t h a t g ra d u a lly ro s e to th e c e ilin g and c r e p t round th e w a lls , he co ntinued to re a d w ith a v o racio u s a p p e tite and to w rite w ith th e ready pen o f th e re v ie w e r. I n 1885 h is o ld U niver­ s i t y reco gnized h is a b i l i t i e s by c o n fe rrin g th e degree o f D. D. upon him. A f u r th e r honor aw aited him when, i n th e s p rin g o f 1891, he d e liv e re d th e K err l e c tu r e s p u b lish e d a fte rw a rd under th e t i t l e o f 'The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e W orld'. T his work, which i s th e f i n e s t and most compre­ h en siv e achievem ent o f h is mind, was w r itte n am idst th e busy a c t i v i t i e s o f h is p a s to r a te . While i t was under weigh, th e two upper windows o f th e manse rem ained lig h te d f a r in to the e a rly hours of th e morning. In May of th e same y e a r he was e le c te d to th e C h air o f Church H is to ry , and passed from th e s ig h t, b u t not from th e a f f e c tio n a te memory o f E ast B ank.° The read in g o f t h i s account cannot h elp b u t leav e one im pres­ sed w ith th e v e r s a t i l i t y o f James O rr.

He p ro v id ed h is congrega­

tio n w ith a s o lid d i e t o f sermons on th e g r e a t C h ris tia n d o c trin e s, h is in s t r u c t i v e m in is try in s p ire d a steady grow th in th e congrega­ tio n , th e stead y in c re a s e in numbers n e c e s s ita te d th e expansion o f th e church and was accompanied by th e enthusiasm re q u ire d to c a rry th e p r o je c t to i t s com pletion. 8 . S c o tt, 2^. o l t .

That th e people a p p re c ia te d

13

h is e f f o r t s I s re v e a le d In th a t th ey In c re a se d h is s tip e n d and Improved th e manse and then alm ost p a id f o r th e improvements In one la r g e o ffe rin g o f more than fo u r hundred pounds. O utside th e range o f th e a c t i v i t i e s of c o n g re g a tio n a l l i f e , he took a prom inent p a r t in d ir e c tin g and d is c u s s in g th e educa­ t i o n a l , s o c ia l and p o l i t i c a l problem s of th e community. H is i n t e r e s t s a ls o extended beyond th e bounds of h i s immediate community.

He re a d w ith a v o racio u s a p p e tite and was c a lle d upon

fre q u e n tly to w rite review s of re c e n t p u b lic a tio n s .

I t was a t t h i s

p e rio d th a t h is f i r s t a r t i c l e s began to appear in r e lig i o u s p e r i­ o d ic a ls and th a t h is f i r s t c o n trib u tio n s were made to l a r g e r works e d ite d and compiled by o th e rs .

He took p a r t in th e p re p a ra tio n

o f The P u lp it Commentary. supplying some o f th e h o m ilies f o r th e volumes on Exodus, Deuteronomy, I I Kings and Hosea.

S h o rtly be­

fo re being c a lle d to th e C hair o f Church H isto ry a t Edinburgh he p re p a re d and d e liv e re d th e K err L e c tu re s. IV.

P ro fe s s o ra te s a t Edinburgh and Glasgow. In May of 1891 Orr was e le c te d to th e C hair of Church His­

to r y a t Edinburgh.

He oocupied t h i s p o s itio n u n t i l th e union

o f th e F ree and U n ited P re s b y te ria n Churches in 1900 when he was tr a n s f e r r e d to th e C hair o f A p o lo g etics and S ystem atic Theology i n Glasgow C o lleg e. O r r 's e le c tio n by th e Synod to th e C h air o f Church H isto ry o ccu rred in th e fo llo w in g manner. "Three o th e rs were nominated f o r th e C hair - namely, th e Revs. W illiam M 'G ilc h rls t, B. D. Androssan; J . P. M itc h e ll, M. A ., Edinburgh; and A lexander H lslo p , M* A ., H elensburgh; b u t Dr. Orr was c a r r ie d by a la rg e a b s o lu te m a jo rity , and

14

had th e volume (The C h ris tia n View of God and th e World) been out I n tim e I t I s l i k e l y no o th e r c a n d id a te w o u ld h a v e been thought o f ." One of h is form er stu d e n ts g iv e s an I n te r e s t in g glim pse of James Orr a s a P ro fe s s o r.

"I was under him In th e o ld U nited

P re s b y te ria n C ollege in Edinburgh: he was th e only 'b i g ' man th e re , and th e m isfo rtu n e was t h a t he was te a c h in g Church His­ to ry : h is own s u b je c t was A p o lo g e tic s.

The only c r itic is m I

heard of him from c le v e r young stu d e n ts was th a t he was tim id , 10 and gave one th e im pression o f b ein g a f r a id f o r th e F a ith . The exact n a tu re and e x te n t o f O r r 's a c t i v i t i e s a s a pro­ f e s s o r , f i r s t o f Church H isto ry and l a t e r of A p o lo g etics and System atic Theology, have n o t been so w ell d escrib ed f o r us as h is p a s to r a te a t Hawick.

Denney does g iv e u s same o f th e i n ­

form ation we d e s ir e . "In h is work as a P ro fe sso r o f A p o lo g etics, Dr. Orr d is ­ charged h is work w ith a thoroughness beyond p r a is e . He had no cheap and easy way of av o id in g d i f f i c u l t i e s . He had s tu d ie d D arw in,and Welsmann, he had an e x p e r t's acquain­ ta n ce w ith c r itic is m , b o th i n th e Old Testament and th e New, he was w idely read i n th e ^ l i t e r a t u r e o f com parative r e lig io n ; and when he d isc u sse d th e d iffe re n c e which was made to th e C h ris tia n view o f God ahd th e World by conclu­ sio n s drawn i n any of th e se f i e l d s , i t was w ith th e know­ ledge which commanded th e re s p e c t even o f th o se he f a i l e d to co n v in ce." x A.

Orr*s A c tiv itie s R e fle o te d In H is Books.

We have an In d ic a tio n o f what h is a c t i v i t i e s were from the books he w rote.

I t was no more co in cid en ce t h a t th e books which

were p u b lish e d d u rin g and im m ediately fo llo w in g th e y e a rs in 9 . Sm all, o^. o l t . , p . 459. 10. R obert M. Buchanan, l e t t e r to H. 8 . Van Wyk, J a n . 6, 1937. 11. James Denney, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr, The B r i t i s h Weekly. S e p t. 11, 1913, p . 576.

15

which he tau g h t Church H isto ry d eal p rim a rily w ith h i s t o r i c a l s u b je o ts .

N eglected F a c to rs in th e Study o f th e E arly P ro g ress

o f C h r is t ia n i ty , The E arly Church: I t s H isto ry and L ite r a tu r e , and The P ro g ress o f Dogma obviously r e f l e c t h is a c t i v i t i e s as a P ro fe s s o r o f Church H is to ry .

I n th e p re fa c e to The H isto ry and

L ite r a tu r e of th e E arly Church we re a d , “In ex p lan atio n o f i t s c o n te n ts i t may be s ta te d th a t th e book i s based on extended le c tu r e s on E arly Church H isto ry given by th e au th o r when P rof e s s o r o f Church H isto ry a t E dinburgh."

12

When we tu rn to th e p e rio d d u rin g which he was P ro fe ss o r o f A polog etics and S ystem atic Theology we f in d th o se s u b je c ts , and h is th in k in g concerning them, r e f le c te d i n h is books.

god1a

Image in Man and i t s Defacement i n th e L ig h t of Modern D en ia ls, The Problem of th e Old T estam ent, Considered w ith R eference to Recent C ritic is m , and The B ib le Under T r i a l, In View of P re se n tDay A ssa u lts on Holy S c rip tu re a l l r e f l e c t th e a p o lo g e tic ap­ p ro ach , w hile The V irg in B ir th of C h r is t, The R e su rre c tio n o f J e s u s , R ev elatio n and I n s p ir a tio n and Sin as a Problem To-day re v e a l th e th e o lo g ic a l em phasis. James Denney g iv e s us an id e a o f th e re s e a rc h in whloh Orr had to engage in th e p re p a ra tio n of th e se volum es. "A ll h is l i f e D r. O rr was a la b o rio u s w orker, and th e range o f h is f i r s t hand knowledge was immense. He d id n o t speak about men l i k e Kant and H egel, Hartmann and Schopenhauer, Schleierm acher and R lts c h l, Spencer and Darwin, from h e a r­ say, o r on th e s tre n g th of compendiums, he had m astered them in t h e i r own w ritin g s , and h is mind was m assive enough to l £ . James O rr,' The H is to ry and L ite r a tu r e o f th e E arly Church. p . v . Revised and en larg ed e d itio n of fE e E arly Church: I t s H isto ry and L i t e r a t u r e .

16

weigh them on i t s own s c a le s and to be I t s own a u th o r ity upon them. I t was th e same w ith more te o h n io a l s u b je o ts o f a n o th e r h in d . H is book on The Problem o f th e Old Testament showed th e c lo se n e ss w ith which he follow ed th e Hebrew S c rip tu re s and th e se rio u s view he had of th e I s s u e s i t r a is e d ; and though he p u b lish ed n o th in g on th e s u b je c t he was eq u ally a t home in th e i n t r i c a c i e s of th e Synoptic pro­ blem and e q u a lly in d e p en d en t."15 T his read in g , re s e a rc h and study he f i r s t shared w ith the s tu d e n ts in th e classroom and th e n w ith th e p u b lic in h is books. B.

O r r 's A c ti v itie s as a L e c tu re r .

C lo sely a s s o c ia te d w ith h is work as a P ro fe ss o r and Author were O r r 's a c t i v i t i e s as a L e c tu re r.

He d e liv e re d h is f i r s t

s e r ie s of le c tu r e s , w hile s t i l l th e p a s to r of th e E ast Bank Church, b e fo re th e stu d e n ts and f a c u lty o f th e U nited P re s b y te ria n 14 H all in Edinburgh in th e sp rin g of 1891. P ro fe s s o r P f l e i d e r e r 's G iffo rd L ec tu re s d e liv e re d in Edin­ burgh in 1894 serv ed as the stim u lu s f o r a s p e c ia l le c tu r e by O rr.

P f l e i d e r e r 's le c tu r e s d id not meet w ith th e ap p ro v al o f

th e th e o lo g ic a l f a c u lty , and P r in c ip a l Rainy, Orr and P ro fe ss o r Dods each d e liv e re d a le c tu r e in r e p l y . A . M. H unter makes t h i s i n t e r e s t i n g comment about t h i s I n c id e n t.

"He along w ith

P r in c ip a l Rainy and P ro fe ss o r Dods championed th e f a i t h in th re e l e c tu r e s (d e liv e re d i n Edinburgh) a g a in s t P ro fe s s o r P f le ld e r e r , a l l heavy w eig h ts, and of course were adm iringly held to have thoroughly p u lv e ris e d him.

I was one of an e n th u s ia s tic a u d i-

13. James Denney, op. c i t . , p . 576. 14. C f. James O rr, The C h ris tia n View of God and th e W orld, P re­ face. 15. C f. The S u p ern atu ral in C h r is tia n ity , a ls o , The T h in k er, 1894, p p . 333-5, 427-9. TKe le c tu r e s were d e liv e re d on March 5, 8 , and 13 r e s p e c tiv e ly .

17

e n c e ." 16 The th re e le c tu r e s which com prise th e volume, N eglected F a c to rs In th e Study o f th e E arly P ro g ress o f C h r is tia n ity were f i r s t d e liv e re d a t th e M ansfield Summer School a t Oxford In 1894. I n O ctober 1897, th e s e same le c tu r e s were d e liv e re d as th e Morgan L ec tu re Course a t th e T h eological Seminary o f Auburn In th e S ta te 17 o f New York. I n th e sp rin g o f 1895 Orr d e liv e re d a s e r ie s o f le c tu r e s on German Theology a t Chicago T h eo lo g ical Seminary, 18 and a ls o preached th e sermon to th e g rad u atin g c la s s . 19 In th e autumn of 1897 he d e liv e re d th e le c tu r e s which now c o n s titu te The P ro g re ss o f Dogma a t th e W estern T h eo lo g ical Semi­ n a ry , A llegheny, P en n sy lv ania, as th e fo u rth s e r ie s o f le c tu r e s pro v id ed by th e E l l i o t L ec tu re sh ip Fund.

20

These le c tu r e s were

p u b lish e d a t th e re q u e s t o f th e fa c ility of t h a t sem inary. We know th a t Orr cro ssed to th e American c o n tin e n t two o th e r tim es to d e liv e r l e c t u r e s .

The le c tu r e s ap p earin g in God1a Image

I n Man were d e liv e re d on the L. P . Stone Foundation b e fo re th e p ro fe s s o rs and s tu d e n ts o f P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Seminary, P rin c e ­ to n , New J e rs e y , from September 28 to October 3, 1903.

The V irgin

B ir th o f C h ris t i s th e product of a s e r ie s o f le c tu r e s d e liv e re d I n th e Chapel of th e F if t h Avenue P re s b y te ria n Church New York C ity , a t fo u r o ’olock i n the a fte rn o o n s, b eg inning Tuesday, A p ril 9 th , and ending F rid a y , A p ril 1 9 th , 1907, under th e a u sp ic e s of 1(5. A. M. H unter, l e t t e r to H. S. Van Wyk, Feb. 26, 1937. 17. Cf. James O rr, N eglected F a c to rs , P re fa c e . 18. C f. The London Times, Monday, S ep t. 8, 1913, p . 9 , c o l. 3. 19. C f. The Homoletlc Review, J u ly , 1895, p . 30. 20. C f. James O rr, The P ro g ress o f Dogma, P re fa c e .

SYNOPSIS OF THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA The appearance of The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia marks an epoch in the study of the Bible in its relation to criticism. The period now drawing to a close has AN witnessed the rising to full tide of speculative criticism and the EPOCHAL beginning of the recession of the wave. There has been for several WORK years a settling back of the thought of scholarly men to a more substantial interpretation of the Bible. In such a situation the Bible student is sure to feel the utter inadequacy of the various Biblical reference works produced in the period of extreme criticism, characterized as FORMER WORKS they are by theoretical interpretation, much of which has been INADEQUATE disproved by the discoveries in archaeological research, while the remainder for the most part is still unproven. Every era has had its exponent in the realm of Bible dictionaries. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia is peculiarly the exponent of the present era as against every other work of its character which has preceded it. While O ? A^NEW ERA full account of what constructive criticism has accomplished and preserving an open mind toward all the results of scholarly investigation, there is, nevertheless, an adherence to fundamental truth that rejects merely theoretical interpretation as not befitting a work of this character. The spirit that has been so widely prevalent in recent years which rejects the idea of the supernatural in nature and history, and the criticism which proceeds on that basis, must reach entirely different results from those attained by that attitude of mind and heart which reverently accepts a true revelation of God in the history of Israel and in Christ. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia gives voice to the best scholarship of the day in its advocacy of a reverent criticism of the Bible. To use the words of an REVERENT eminent scholar, “This new Encyclopaedia is a work which the CRITICISM earnest student of the Bible may reverently trust; its spirit is that of the Bible which it attempts to expound.” In point of scholarship it is second to none of the great works which have preceded Over two hundred scholarly men, numbered among whom are some of the greatest scholars of the century, have contributed to its pages. The GenTHKIBEAL era] Editor, the late Reverend Professor James Orr, of Glasgow, GREAT LIFE Scotland, is everywhere recognized as one of the most profound BROUGHT TO Bible scholars of his time. To the production of this Encyclopaedia CONSUMMATION be gave in fullest measure the heritage of his ripe scholarship. Dr. Orr in the spirit of final devotion to an ideal brought to this enterprise all his erudition, scientific knowledge, and wide acquaintance with Biblical scholars, in order that he might give to the world in enduring form the full fruitage of a lifetime spent in a devout study and interpretation of God’s Holy Word. it.

Associated with Dr. Orr as assistant editors were Bishop John L. Nuelsen, resident at Zurich, Switzerland, and President Edgar Y. Mullins of Louisville, Kentucky. Both A PRACTICAL these men, widely known for scolarly attainments, brought to OUTLOOK the editorship of the Encyclopaedia a practical view of the need of the time which few men could have contributed. Dr. Morris 0 . Evans, now of Seattle, Washington, late of Independent College, Bangor, Wales, filled the position of managing editor, and the peculiar evenness of the ACCURACY work, its freedom from the conflicting statements which have EVENNESS characterized so many other scholarly encyclopaedias, and the EXACTNESS great exactness which are apparent throughout the whole constitute in themselves the best tribute to his genius.

A page from a pam phlet d e s c rib in g The I n te r n a tio n a l Standard B ib le E ncyclopaedia.

18

th e B ib le T each ers' T ra in in g C o lleg e.

21 22

*

I t i s e n tir e ly p ro b ab le th a t t h i s account o f O rr's le c tu r e s i s q u ite Incom plete, Judging from a b r i e f n o tic e concerning h is proposed i t i n e r a r y in th e S yllabus f o r th e le c tu r e s on th e V irgin B irth of C h r is t.

"A fter d e liv e r in g th e course of le c tu r e s h e re in

announced, Dr. Orr w ill v i s i t s e v e ra l c i t i e s and th e o lo g ic a l semi­ n a r ie s where he w ill give s p e c ia l l e c t u r e s .

Among p la c e s to be

v i s i t e d by Dr. Orr a r e : P rin c e to n , New Brunswick, P h ila d e lp h ia , Richmond, Chicago, L o u is v ille , S p rin g fie ld (O hio), P itts b u r g and B o sto n ."^ 3 Perhaps i t i s not sa fe to conclude th a t each tim e Orr came to America he f u l f i l l e d a schedule o f le o tu re s as ex­ te n s iv e as t h i s , b u t su re ly th e se le c tu r e to u rs were more extended th an th e fo regoing account would in d ic a te .

The fo llo w in g s ta te ­

ment from th e P re fa c e to S id e lig h ts on C h ris tia n D o ctrin e w ritte n i n March 1909 confirm s t h i s c o n c lu sio n .

"The S tu d ies in th e

Volume a re based upon A ddresses on C h ris tia n D o ctrin e given a t v a rio u s Conferences and B ib le Schools in A m erica." C.

O rr' s A c ti v itie s a s an E d ito r .

O r r 's work a s an e d ito r seems to have been lim ite d to th re e p r o je c ts .

He e d ite d The New Testament Apocryphal W ritin g s which

were p u b lish e d in 1903.

He and James Denney were th e c o - e d ito rs

of The Union Magazine w hile i t was s t i l l b ein g p u b lish e d . H is g re a t work as an e d ito r was h is s e rv ic e as G-eneral and 21. Now The B ib lic a l Seminary in New York. 22. C f. James O rr, The V irg in B ir th of C h r is t, P re fa c e , and th e S y llab u s o f th e L ec tu re s on The V irg in B ir th of C h r is t. 23. Loc. c l t . 24. James O rr, S id e lig h ts on C h ris tia n D o c trin e . P re fa c e .

INDIVIDUAL APPRECIATION OF THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA A large number of letters from purchasers of The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia have been received, from among which the following have been selected « as fairly representative:

Rev. JohnTimothyStone. Presbyterian Theological Seminaro, Chicago: “I have referred many times to The International Standard Bible Ency­ clopaedia and have always found what I have looked for. A work made nn of such splendid exposition and opinion will constantly grow m favor and use­ fulness. Prof. Orr certainly surrounded himself with capable and scholarly assistants in the prepa­ ration of this splendid Encyclopaedia. One of my friends, a Bible teacher of large influence, wrote to me that she sat up well into the night when the books first arrived, so fascinated was she by the scope and quality of the work.” President M G. Kyle: “The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, if we take account of its character and completeness, stands in a class by itself. Its appearance will a t once delight the eye of all those who read Bible dictionaries. The maps have a distinctness and satisfactoriness that can only be appreciated when seen, while the photo­ graphs from many sources are unsurpassed in book work. The candor of the Encyclopaedia is most commendable. Tn th e most, important canes ex­ ponents of divergent views are permitted to speak for thfimtffilYe8jn separate.articles- But the treat feature of the Encyclopaedia is that in it scholar­ ship ‘speaks English.’ The articles are not cum­ bered with ‘dry-as-du8t’ technicalities th a t do not supply a single grain of truth which the writer has found, but only put in evidence the chaff th a t has accumulated in the course of the investigation. The articles in this Encyclopaedia present only the valuable results of research and that in language intelligible to persons of ordinary non-technical education.”

P r o f . B u r t o n S. E a s t o n . General Theological Seminary, New York: “The completion of The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia is a great and triumphant undertaking of high rank. Many of the articles surpass any single monographs that have been written o n th eir respectivesubiect find will certainly become classics. The archaeolog­ ical articles are authoritative, and the frequent and thorough theological and practical discussions are sure to prove superlatively useful. And on the critical side the conservative position is presented with dignity and scholarship.” Doctor Oeorob T,. Robinson. Professor in Chicago Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Chi­ cago: “The International Standard Bible Encycloaedia is a work which the earnest student of the lible may reverently trust; its contributors are all scholarly men; its spirit is that of the Bible which it attempts to expound. In scope, attitude and I 'M*(~i 11 characteristic features it is all tld=V in an Encyclopaedia. The editing goes far beyond in superiority any previous work. A set should be fauna in every minister’s library; but it will also prove a valuable and useful help to all Bible stu­ dents and Sunday School teachers.”

S

Rev. G. Campbell Morgan. P .P.. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: nI have a t once the greatest con­ fidence and very real pleasure in recommending to all Bible students the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia. Its chief value consists in the fact of its unquestioned and up-to-date scholar­ ship, combined with its lovaltv to the Bible as God-brealhed Literature. In no case is scholarship sacrificed to a prejudiced opinion of the nature of that Literature; but equally, in no case is it ham­ by a modem and materialistic philosophy. Doctor Henry E. Jacobs, Philadelphia. Presi­ pered I consider the work invaluable to young preachers, dent Mt. Airy Theological Seminary: “During who may consult it without any fear as to its the two days th a t The International Standard Bible integrity and scholarship, and with certainty of its Encyclopaedia has been in my possession it has very real helpfulness.” absorbed the most of my attention. In fact I have had difficulty in turning to any other subject. I Rev. HenryE.Dobker.formerly of Presbyterian am both surprised ana delighted with it. You Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky: “I have carefully must pardon me for saying that I had expected that, examined the volumes and spent a whole day in in the endeavor to be popular, the scientific char­ reading some of the chief articles in the new Ency­ acter of the undertaking would have been sacrificed. * clopaedia. Unless I am wholly mistaken, this work All such impressions, however, have been entirely fills a place all its own. The list of contributors removed. I t promises to tek« rank as the most commands respect before one has read a line. The trustworthy work of its kind in our language. work is complete, splendidly edited, detailed with­ Every one of the more extended articles read con- out being cumbersome, scholarly and yet conser­ firms this judgment. It has kept thoroughly vative, and seems to me to be the very tool for abreast of current discussions ana utilized their which the ministry and intelligent laymen haveresults, but a t the same time has treated them with been on the lookout. Former recent works of the a scientific criticism that deals with them dis- kind overlooked the fact that the vast majority of criminatively and is not captivated by mere novel­ the church, both among ministers and laymen, ties. With all my heart I welcome your work and are hopelessly tired of the so-called scholarship am glad, although in a very humble way, to have which broke down without building up and which my name associated with it.” confused hypothesis with proven truth.” PqoF. F>ntrK. Farr.Lane Theological Seminary, R e v . F r a n e F . H r e g e n . Former President of Charles City College: “The International Standard Cincinnati, Ohio: “The new International Stan­ Bible Encyclopaedia is a monumental work: schol­ dard Bible Encyclopaedia far exceeds my expecta­ arly and exhaustive in content; lucid and system- tions in beauty of mechanical production, fulness of atic in its arrangement, yet popular and pleasing in lists of titles, and completeness of treatment. Con­ its style. The student, the preacher ana the Sun­ sidering the interval which has elapsed since the day School worker will find, as he uses it, th at his publication of any similar work of equal scope, appreciation of the work will constantly increase, there was need of such an Encyclopaedia as this to ana he will soon come to regard it as indispensable. embody and make accessible the results of archaeoThe present generation will not outgrow this Ency­ logical investigation and scholarly research, if clopaedia: it will endure as one of the truly great for no other reason. This important service the new work has well performed.” products of our age.”

A page from a pamphlet desorlblng The International Standard Bible Enoyolopaedla*

19

C onsulting E d ito r o f The I n te r n a tio n a l S tandard B ib le Encyclo­ p ae d ia which was n o t p u b lish ed u n t i l a f t e r h is d ea th .

To t h i s

work he h im self c o n trib u te d t h i r t y - s i x m ajor a r t i c l e s and hundreds o f s h o r te r ones.

L a te r e d itio n s of t h i s work, which c a rry h is

p ic tu r e as th e f r o n tis p ie c e , appeared in 1950 and 1940. D.

O r ^ s E f f o r ts in B eh alf o f Church Union.

A nother problem which occupied th e a t te n t io n o f Orr during t h i s p e rio d was th a t of r e u n itin g th e P re s b y te ria n churches o f S co tlan d , a movement in which he took a prom inent p a r t and one which he saw c a r r ie d to a su c c e ssfu l c o n c lu sio n . J . R. Fleming, G eneral S ecretary of th e P re s b y te ria n A l l i ­ ance, sin g le d out two men as b ein g p re-em in e n tly re s p o n sib le f o r s u c c e s s fu lly b rin g in g about th e union o f th e two ch u rch es.

He

th u s d e s c rib e s th e l a s t a c t o f th e U nited P re s b y te ria n Synod: "P ro fe sso r Orr who, w ith Dr. Thomas Kennedy, had s te e re d th e Union sh ip w ith conspicuous success I n to h a rb o r, moved th e acceptance of th e l a s t J o in t r e p o r t, to which a sse n t was given by a sta n d in g v o te w ith u p lif te d r ig h t hand, th e whole c o u rt th en 25 u n itin g in th e Doxology." Concerning h is a c t i v i t i e s In t h i s movement and h is a t t i t u d e toward reu n io n , James Denny, h is co llea g u e, w rote a t h i s d eath: "In th e n e g o tia tio n s which preceded th e union o f th e Free and th e U nited P re s b y te ria n Churches t h i r t e e n y e a rs ago he took a conspicuous and la b o rio u s p a r t , and he was profoundly a tta c h e d to th e p r in c ip le s b o th of Churdh Freedom and of R e lig io u s E q u a lity . W hile, l i k e most Scotchmen, he was in ­ t e r e s te d i n th e reu n io n o f th e P re s b y te ria n churches he 25. A H isto ry o f th e Church of S co tla n d , 1875-1929, T. & T. C lark, Edinburgh, 1933, p . 47.

20

would probably have agreed w ith th e remark made by a member o f th e l a s t Assembly, th a t I t was more Im portant t h a t th e re should be a F re egChurch in S co tlan d th an th a t th e re should be one C hurch."2 W. Robertson N lc o ll made mention of O rr's e f f o r t s I n b e h a lf o f union between th e S c o ttis h churches in th e fo llo w in g term s. "Dr. Orr took a v ery le a d in g p a r t in th e su c c e s sfu l n eg o tia­ tio n s fo r union between th e Free Church o f S cotland and h is own U nited P re s b y te ria n Church. I t would be d i f f i c u l t to exaggerate th e se rv ic e he ren d ered in t h i s co n n e ctio n . His s e rv ic e was g iv en w ith th e most e n tir e u n s e lfis h n e s s . . • • To some o f h is f rie n d s i t appeared t h a t h is work i n t h i s con­ n e c tio n was in a d e q u a te ly a p p re c ia te d , b u t we b e lie v e th a t he h im se lf d e p re c ia te d and d e c lin e d th e honours th a t were h is d u e ."27 E.

O rr1s P a rt in R e lig io u s C ontroversy.

I n 1901, George Adam Smith, P ro fe ss o r of Hebrew and Old T esta­ ment L ite r a tu r e i n th e U nited F ree Church C ollege of Glasgow pub­ lis h e d a volume of le c tu r e s d e liv e re d in America a t Yale U niver­ s it y under th e t i t l e Modem C ritic is m and th e Preaching o f th e Old T estam ent.

His fe llo w churchmen charged him w ith ad vocating

h e r e t i c a l views in th e se l e c t u r e s .

A memorial embodying th e se

charges was se n t to th e College Committee from a m eeting h e ld in Edinburgh in September 1901.

That committee in v e s tig a te d th e

charges and p rep ared a re p o rt which was p re se n te d to th e Assembly which met i n Glasgow in 1902.

James Orr and Ross T aylor shared

th e r e s p o n s ib ility of defending P ro fe s s o r Sm ith.

I n making t h i s

defence O rr i s re p o rte d to have p a id h is co llea g u e a f in e ly - e x p re sse d t r i b u t e o f p r a is e . "Whatever th e y flig h t th in k o f P ro fe s s o r S m ith 's s p e c u la tio n s , he remarked, th e re could be b u t one o p in io n among them th a t 26. The B r iti s h Weekly, Sept. 11, 1915, p . 576. 27. W. R obertson N lc o ll, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr, i b i d . , p . 567.

21

he a t l e a s t had nobly proved in th e p a s t h is f a i t h , z e a l, and e v a n g e lic a l f i d e l i t y , by works th a t had made h is name a household word and an honour; th a t he had preached a liv i n g g o sp e l, and had been made in s tru m e n ta l, a s few were, by tongue o f f i r e and v iv id im ag in atio n and p ro p h e tic fe rv o u r to k in d le f a i t h and move to g o d lin e ss i n an age f a r l o s t to p ro p h e tic I d e a l s . R ather than a c c e n tu a te by c o n tin u a l con­ tro v e rs y and new Committees th e p o in ts on which th e y might unhappily d i f f e r , l e t them u n ite in th an k in g God f o r th e g i f t He had given in him, and f o r th e work he had been enabled to accom plish f o r God's g lo r y ." 28 The com m ittee's re p o rt was c o n c ilia to r y , S m ith 's ex p lan atio n s were lik e w ise p a c if ic a to r y and P r in c ip a l Rainy made a pow erful speech f o r to le ra n c e .

The d e c isio n of th e Assembly was a v ic to ry

f o r th e C ollege Committee and th e offen d in g P ro fe s s o r. T his in c id e n t i l l u s t r a t e s th e statem ent by Louis Matthews Sweet, "He once s a id in th e h e a rin g o f th e w r ite r th a t he had spent h is l i f e f ig h tin g h eresy and defending h e r e t i c s ." V.

PQ

D eath. James Orr d ie d a t th e age o f s ix ty - n in e .

He was su rv iv ed

by h is w ife and two sons, James Orr and W. G. O rr.

S o o tt has

given a b r i e f summary o f th e f i n a l y ea rs of h is l i f e . " I t does n o t l i e w ith in th e scope of t h i s h is to r y to fo llo w h is c a re e r a t le n g th . S u f f ic ie n t to say, th a t a t th e Union o f th e Free and U nited P re s b y te ria n Churches in 1900 he was tr a n s f e r r e d to th e C hair o f A p o lo g etics and S ystem atic The­ ology in th e Glasgow C o lleg e. There he co ntinued h is work f o r th ir te e n y e a rs , adding volumes to h is name and g a th e rin g to h im self w ith age 'honour, lo v e , obedience, tro o p s o f f r i e n d s '. On th e 6 th o f September, 1913, h is g re a t b ra in and k in d ly h e a r t were s t i l l e d by th e f in g e r of d e a th , and he p assed in to th e p resen ce o f th e u n v e ile d T ruth o f God__ where th e seek er fin d s r e s t a t l a s t in e te r n a l r e a l i t y . * '30 28. H. F . Henderson, The R e lig io u s C o n tro v e rsies o f S c o tla n d . T. & T. C lark, Edinburgh, 1905, p . 228. A d d itio n a l d e t a i l s pp. 223-230. 29. The B ib le M agazine, Dec. 1913, p . 952. 30. Stew art R. S c o tt, E ast Bank Church, Hawick; I t s O rig in and H is to ry .

22

V I.

E stim ates of H is L if e , His Work and H is P e r s o n a lity . Because so l i t t l e has been w ritte n about th e l i f e of James

Orr and because t h a t which has been w r itte n I s n o t e a s ily acces­ s i b l e , s e v e ra l a r t i c l e s which summarize h is a c t i v i t i e s w ill be p re se n te d In th e fo llo w in g p ag e s.

The account o f h is l i f e as

given by Stew art R. S c o tt has a lre a d y been given In I t s e n tir e ty (w ith th e excep tio n o f a sin g le sentence) on th e p reced in g p a g e s.3^A.

£n A p p reciatio n by James Denney.

The account o f O rr’ s a c t i v i t i e s by Denney I s e s p e c ia lly v a l­ u a b le sin c e th e two men were c o lle a g u e s on th e F acu lty of th e U nited Free Church C ollege a t Glasgow from 1900 to 1913. and O rr were a ls o c o - e d ito rs of The Union Magazine, *

Denney

su ccesso r

o f th e 2* £• Magazine and th ey worked hand In hand in t h e i r e f­ f o r t s to u n ite th e F ree and U n ited P re s b y te ria n Churches of Scot­ la n d . "The news o f D r. O rr’s d ea th w ill be h e a rd w ith tr u e sorrow f a r beyond th e lim its o f h is own Church and co u n try . He was n o t only th e d is tin g u is h e d r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f an a t t i t u d e and o f o p in io n s In r e lig io n which are d e a r to many, he had in an unusual degree th e power of commanding th e confidence and a f f e c tio n o f th o se he r e p re s e n te d . There was n o th in g to overcome i n approaching him. He ap p ealed to men w ith th e w eight of a m assive and sim ple n a tu re , i n t e l l e c t u a l l y power­ f u l and s e l f - r e l i a n t , s p i r i t u a l l y humble and s in c e r e , and, above a l l , tr a n s p a re n tly d is i n te r e s t e d . When he to o k a sid e d e c is iv e ly I n co n tro v e rsy , I t was because he o b v io u sly be­ lie v e d I t to be th e r ig h t a id e , n o t because I t was th e safe sid e o r because th e re was an y th in g to be made by I t . “H is s p e c ia l I n t e l l e c t u a l g i f t s were p h ilo s o p h ic a l. I t was I n p h ilo s o p h ic a l stu d y th a t he was most d is tin g u is h e d a t th e U n iv e rs ity , and n o th in g marks h i s whole work as a 31. C f. p p . 9 , 10, 11, 12, 21. 3 2 . C f. J . R. Flem ing, A H isto ry o f th e Church of S c o tla n d , 18751929, T. & T. C la rk ,“Edinburgh, 1933, p . 265.

23

te a c h e r o f theology more s tro n g ly th a n h i s sense of th e u n ity o f knowledge* He had l i t t l e p a tie n c e w ith th e th in k e rs - o r th e enemies o f th in k in g - who d iv id e th e w orld and th e mind between sc ien c e and r e lig i o n , and who t e l l us th a t i t need n o t o r does n o t make any d iffe re n c e to our r e lig io u s f a i t h though we change our minds on q u e stio n s o f p h y s ic a l sc ie n c e , o f p h ilo so p h y , o r o f h isto ry * The mind f o r him was J u s t th e In stru m en t f o r th e u n if ic a tio n o f a l l th e tr u t h w ith in our re a c h , and a d iffe re n c e a t any p o in t made a d if ­ fe re n c e a l l th ro u g h . I t was c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of him t h a t h is f i r s t g re a t hook was 'The C h ris tia n View o f Cod and th e W o rld '• I t i s in s p ir e d by th e c o n v ic tio n th a t th e r e i s such a 'th in g as t h i s C h ris tia n view , and t h a t I t I s th e ta s k of C h ris tia n in te llig e n c e to s t a t e and develop i t , and a ls o to a s s e r t i t a g a in s t o th e r views by which i t I s menaced o r destroyed* In h is work as a P ro fe s s o r of A p o lo g etlo s, Dr. O rr d isch arg ed h is work w ith a thoroughness beyond p r a is e . He had no cheap o r easy way of av o id in g d i f f i c u l t i e s . He had s tu d ie d Darwin and Welsmann, he had an e x p e rtJ s ac­ quain tan ce w ith C ritic is m , b o th In th e Old Testam ent and th e New, he was w idely re a d i n th e l i t e r a t u r e o f compara­ t i v e r e lig i o n ; and when he d isc u sse d th e d iffe re n c e which was made to th e C h ris tia n view o f Cod and th e w orld by con­ c lu s io n s drawn In any o f th e se f i e l d s , i t was w ith a khowle d g e which commanded th e re s p e c t even of th o se he f a i l e d to convlnoe* "A ll h is l i f e Dr. O rr was a la b o rio u s w orker, and th e range of h is f i r s t hand knowledge was Immense. He d id not speak about men li k e S ant and Hegel, Hartmann and Schopen­ h a u e r, Schleierm aoher and R lts o h l, Spencer and Darwin, from h e a rsa y , o r on th e s tre n g th o f compendlums, he had m astered them I n t h e i r own w r itin g s , and h is mind was m assive enough to weigh them I n i t s own s c a le s and to be i t s own a u th o r ity upon them* I t was th e same w ith more te c h n ic a l s u b je c ts of an o th e r kind* His book on 'The Problem of th e Old T esta­ m ent' showed th e clo sen e ss w ith which he had follow ed th e Hebrew S c rip tu re s and th e s e rio u s view he had of th e is s u e s I t r a is e d ; and though he p u b lis h e d n o th in g on th e s u b je c t he was eq u a lly a t home In th e i n t r i c a c i e s of th e S ynoptic problem and eq u a lly Independent* But w ith a l l h is knowledge, D r. Orr was s in g u la rly f re e from academic p re ju d ic e or p re­ te n s io n . He n ev er gave h im self a irs * He f e l t t h a t know­ led g e was a u n iv e rs a l I n t e r e s t , and t h a t he not only m ight, b u t v ery p ro b ab ly would, le a r n something from every man he met* He was a r e a l member o f th e Church, and th e Church and i t s members had a work and an a u th o rity i n h i s mind which th ey do not always have i n th e mind o f sch o lars* He would have re s e n te d a s a k in d o f Im piety th e p o p u la ris in g o f know­ ledg e - he would n o t t a l k down to anybody - b u t no man was more devoted to th e d if f u s io n of i t . I t never o o curred to him t h a t what he could u n d ersta n d o th e rs would be u n ab le to a p p r e c ia te , and accomodation was an a r t he could n e ith e r

24

p r a c t i s e n o r pardon* The t r a d i t i o n a l S c o ttis h id e a l of an i n t e l l i g e n t C h r is tia n p u b lic , b e fo re which a l l cau ses must be argued o u t, was deeply ro o te d in h i s mind, and he would probably have s a id o f i t , as Gibbon of i t s c o u n te rp a rt, th e p u b lio i s seldom wrong. "This sense of th e Church i n h is th o u g h ts c o n trib u te d to g iv e him h is unique p la c e in th e Church i t s e l f . No one co u ld see him r i s e in th e Assembly w ith o u t f e e lin g how much he re p re s e n te d and how much depended on h is word* A ques­ tio n whioh might have been burked o r sh irk e d o r pooh-poohed i n o th e r hands became s e rio u s and in e v ita b le i f he i d e n t i ­ f i e d h im self w ith i t . I n th e n e g o tia tio n s which preceded th e union o f th e Free and th e U nited P re s b y te ria n Churches t h i r t e e n y e a rs ago he took a conspicuous and la b o rio u s p a r t , and he was profoundly a tta o h e d to th e p r in c ip le s b o th of Church Freedom and of R e lig io u s E q u ality * W hile, l i k e most Scotchmen, he was in te r e s te d i n th e reu n io n of th e Presby­ t e r i a n ch u rch es, he would probably have agreed w ith th e r e ­ mark made by a Member of th e l a s t Assembly, th a t i t was more im portant t h a t th e re should be a Free Church i n Scot­ la n d th an th a t th e r e should be one Church. N e ith e r i n h is e c c l e s i a s t i c a l n o r in h is o l v l l p o l i t i c s was Dr* Orr a f r a id to be i n a m in o rity , and o f a l l th e lo s s e s which th e Union Committee - to c a l l i t so - has s u f fe re d , none i s to be more deeply lam ented th an t h a t which h as b e f a lle n i t in h is death* He re p re s e n te d i n i t w ith w eight and magnanimity something which must have i t s p la c e i n any u n ite d Presby­ t e r i a n Church o f Scotland* "Much as he w ill be m issed i n th e Church a t la r g e , i t i s only th o se who have been long and In tim a te ly a s s o c ia te d w ith him i n f rie n d s h ip and in common work who know what a blan k i s made by h i s absence* I t i s n o t to o much to speak o f i t a s a bereavement* He was made f o r frie n d s h ip , and few men can have had a w ider c i r c l e o f devoted f r ie n d s . H is humanity was so ample and so a c c e s s ib le , he was so un­ s e l f i s h and so a b le to h e lp , th a t i t was tem pting to p re ­ sume on h is kindness* He was an id e a l c o lle a g u e , always w illin g to ta k e h is sh are o r more th a n h is sh are i n common r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , and alw ays w illin g to do what co u ld be done w ithout o a rin g who g o t th e c r e d it o f i t * The sense o f lo s s l i k e t h i s , even i n th e co m paratively e x te rn a l re ­ l a t i o n s of l i f e , g iv es u s a dim id e a of what i t must be i n th e in tim acy of home, and a l l who knew D r. Orr w ill th in k w ith th e d eep est and most r e s p e c tf u l sympathy o f Hrs* Orr and t h e i r fam ily* He was a g re a t g i f t o f God to th e Church i n a p erp lex ed and anxious tim e, and many w ill be I n s p ir e d a s lo n g as th ey l i v e by th e memory o f h i s la b o rio u s , mag­ nanimous and t r u l y C h ris tia n f a ith * -33 33* James Denney, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr, The B r i t i s h Weekly. S e p t. 11, 1913, p . 576*

B•

An A p p re c ia tio n by W. R obertson N lc o ll*

The r e f le c tio n s o f W. R obertson N lc o ll on th e p e r s o n a lity o f Orr a re worth co n sid e rin g because o f h is p o s itio n as th e edi­ t o r o f th e B r i t i s h Weekly. "We deeply r e g r e t to announce th e d eath of our esteem ed f r ie n d and c o n tr ib u to r , th e Rev. Dr. James O rr, of th e United F ree Church C o lleg e, Glasgow. A worthy t r i b u t e to h i s memory I s p a id In our columns by h is o o lle ag u e , Dr. Denney, and to t h i s we have v ery l i t t l e to add. Dr. Orr was a man o f e x tra ­ o rd in a ry a tta in m e n ts , and h is h a b it o f l i f e was a l l through t h a t of c e a s e le s s la b o u r. He was v ery w idely re a d , b u t th e re was n o th in g s u p e r f ic ia l In h is n a tu re . He ad d ressed h is own mind to every problem he ta c k le d . For many y e a rs he was, we b e lie v e , an in c is iv e and e r u d ite c r i t i c In a le ad in g S o o ttls h new spaper, b u t he became known to th e g e n e ra l com­ m unity by h is g r e a t work on th e 'C h r is tia n View of God and th e World*• He was one o f th o se who p erce iv ed e a r ly th e Im­ mense s tre n g th o f th e 'o rth o d o x ' p o s itio n s , and he gave h is l i f e to th e e x p o s itio n and defence of th e theology in which he had been tr a in e d . He made co n cessio n s, as was in e v ita b le , b u t he su rre n d ered no a r t i c l e o f th e c a th o lic t r u t h . No one i n our tim e has more p o w erfu lly and p e r s i s t e n t l y m aintained th e tr u e su p e rn a tu ra lism o f C h r is tia n ity as m a n ife st a lik e i n th e word and th e work of God. Dr. Orr took a v e ry lead ­ in g p a r t i n th e su c c e s sfu l n e g o tia tio n s f o r union between th e Free Church o f S cotland and h is own U nited P re s b y te ria n Church. I t would be d i f f i c u l t to ex ag g erate th e s e rv ic e he ren d ered i n t h i s co n n ectio n . His s e rv ic e was g iven w ith th e most e n tir e u n s e lfis h n e s s . He might have tak en f o r h is motto 'L e t our C od's p r a is e Go b ra v e ly through th e world a t l a s t What ca re through me o r t h e e '. To some of h is f r ie n d s i t appeared t h a t h is work i n t h i s con­ n e c tio n was In ad eq u a tely a p p re c ia te d , b u t we b e lie v e th a t he h im se lf d ep rec ate d and d e c lin e d th e honours t h a t were h is due. He w ill be g r e a tly m issed a lik e in t h i s co u n try and in America, b u t most of a l l i n th e immediate spheres o f h is honourable l i f e and la b o u r ." 0 C.

An A p p re c ia tio n by L ouis Matthews Sweet.

The opinion of L ouis Matthews Sweet i s v a lu a b le because he knew O rr f i r s t th ro u g h h is books and l a t e r as a te a c h e r and 34. W. R. N lc o ll, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr, The B r i t i s h Weekly, S e p t. 11, 1913, p . 576.

26

frie n d * "The d eath of P ro fe s s o r James O rr, D* D*, o f th e U nited Free Church C ollege, Glasgow, removes from s ig h t and p la c e s among th e im m ortals one o f th e forem ost r e lig io u s le a d e rs o f our day* "How lo n g P ro fe s s o r O r r 's hooks w ill con tin u e to he re a d no one can s a fe ly v en tu re to p r e d lo t, hut t h e i r e x tra ­ o rd in a ry vogue and w idespread in flu e n c e d u rin g h is own l i f e i n view of h is a t t i t u d e tow ard c u rre n t o p in io n g u aran tee t h e i r permanent p la c e in th e h is to ry o f th e o lo g ic a l thought d u rin g our e ra , w hile t h e i r p erv asiv e in flu e n c e even over minds not in sympathy w ith h is c o n s e rv a tiv e views and t h e i r to n ic e f f e c t upon a l l c la s s e s of th o u g h tfu l men e s ta b lis h f o r a l l tim e h is p o s itio n as prophet and lead er* "The w r ite r o f th e se li n e s owes D r. Orr a double debt o f g r a titu d e and pays h is t r i b u t e o f v e n e ra tio n and a ffe c ­ t i o n w ith keen s a tis f a c tio n * At a c r i t i c a l p e rio d of h is own l i f e , when every fundam ental co n v lo tio n was in th e m elt­ in g p o t, 'The C h ris tia n View of God and th e World1, beyond a l l q u estio n Dr* O r r 's g r e a te s t book, came in to h is hands* The read in g of t h i s monumental work o f le a r n in g , s a n ity , candor, and d i a l e c t i c a l s k i l l was not only an I n t e l l e c t u a l d e lig h t - alm ost an ed u catio n - b u t r e s u lte d in e s ta b lis h in g h i s mind in ways o f th in k in g which have brought in c re a s e d assu ran ce w ith ev ery added hour of ex p erien ce, m e d ita tio n , and study* "To how many thousands among our r e lig io u s le a d e r s Dr* O rr has th u s been a tower o f s tre n g th i t would be im p o ssib le to sa y . The v ery f a c t th a t a man w ith h is encyclopaedic le a rn in g and m assive and p e n e tr a tiv e mind stood f o r a sane co n v e rsatio n in d e a lin g w ith th e B ib le and the fundam ental t r u t h s o f C h r is tia n ity has meant much to m u ltitu d e s o f young men a t th e p a r tin g o f th e ways* I n a d d itio n , h is a c tu a l c o n trib u tio n s to th e d isc u ss io n o f v i t a l q u estio n s on th e ­ ology and B ib lic a l c r itic is m a re o f in e s tim a b le permanent value* "In a d d itio n to t h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l d e b t, th e w r i te r i s In d eb ted to Dr* Orr f o r a g racio u s f rie n d s h ip and f o r such encouragement a s can be g iv en by a g re a t le a d e r to a youth­ f u l b eg in n er in s e rv ic e . What Dr* O r r 's f rie n d s h ip has meant in th e way o f in s p i r a tio n no words can t e l l , b u t i t re v e a le d a s id e o f Dr* O rr o f which th e p u b lic , which knew him only in th e books he w ro te, could n o t w ell be aware* He was a g re a t le a d e r and te a c h e r, a g r e a t th in k e r and w r ite r , a g r e a t sc h o la r and d e b a te r, b u t he was a ls o a g re a t and noble C h ris tia n man* In h is f a i t h he was as sim ple as a c h ild * I n h is a t t i t u d e to men he was f u l l of th e most te n d e r c h a rity * He once s a id i n th e h e a rin g o f

27

th e w r ite r th a t he had spent h is l i f e f ig h tin g h eresy and defend in g h e r e t i c s . His p ra y e rs , b o th In p u b lic and In h is fam ily d e v o tio n s, were w onderful In t h e i r d ir e c tn e s s and s im p lic ity . He h a b itu a lly had acoess to th e p rese n ce o f God. “He was a d e lig h tf u l g u e s t, a l b e i t somewhat a b s e n tminded a f t e r th e manner o f th o se deeply absorbed I n th e w orld o f th o u g h t. C hildren lo v ed him and wept when he went away. “As might be expected from th e magnitude o f h is l i f e work, Dr. Orr was an a b s o lu te ly In d e fa tig a b le t o l l e r . His m aster p a ssio n was h is work. H is g re a t l im ita tio n was h is I n a b i l i t y to r e s t o r to e n te r In to r e c r e a tio n . He found h is p la c e , and th e n , w ithout re s e rv e , 'b u rn ed to th e so c k et.'. “His d eath a t th e com paratively e a rly age o f s ix ty n in e , in s p ite o f h is p o sse ssio n o f th e n a tu r a l physique o f a g ia n t, I s th e b e s t p o s s ib le evidence o f th e t o l l by day and n ig h t th a t wore th a t mighty body to an exceeding f in e n e s s , and, a t th e end, r e le a s e d th e s p i r i t to a h ig h e r l i f e and s e r v ic e ."35 D.

M A p p re cia tio n

W illiam Ewing.

A t r i b u t e to James Orr i s p re s e n te d h ere j u s t as i t was d is ­ covered In a pam phlet d e s c rib in g th e I n te r n a tio n a l S tandard B ible E ncyclopaedia. JAMES ORR—A TRIBUTE

WilliamEwing

“Dr. Orr’s lot was cast in a time of mental unrest affecting men’s beliefs in every sphere—a time of revolt from authority and unique development of the critical spirit. All theories and doctrines were alike called in question. I t was proposed to grant tolerance of life only to such as should successfully vindicate their claim a t the bar of reason. Many voices were heard in depreciation of the Christian faith. . . . Among the more superficial an attitude of skepticism became popular. It seemed as if a claim to intellectual respectability could hardly be made good if a man had not moved some distance from the old positions of faith. . Dr. Orr was a true child of his age. He never took anything a t second hand, however great the names quoted in its support might be. Every demand for credence he subjected to thorough investigation and unsparing criticism. . . . H e supplied a needed corrective to the tendency to found startling propositions on vague generalities, or on mere hearsay evidence. . . . His great philosophical gifts, and his profound sense of the unity of knowl­ edge, lent dearness and coherency to his thought. . . . He sought to maintain a ju st proportion and true perspective; to avoid the errors incident to a partial or one-sided view. . . . To quote Dr. Denney, his friend and colleague, ‘He was a great gift of God to the church in a perplexed and anxious time, and many will be inspired as long as they live by the memory of his laborious, magnanimous and truly Christian faith.’ ”

35. L ouis Matthews Sweet, The B ib le M agazine. V ol. I . No. 12, December 1913, pp . 951-3.

PART I I THE TIMES IN WHICH ORB. LIVED During th e tim es in which O rr liv e d , - th e l a t t e r h a l f o f th e n in e te e n th and th e e a rly y e a rs of th e tw e n tie th c e n tu r ie s , - g r e a t movements were i n p ro g ress*

During th e e a rly p a r t of

th a t p e rio d th e S c o ttis h philosophy of common sense reach ed i t s z e n ith i n Hamilton and began i t s decline*

T h is was due la r g e ly

to th e renewed ascendency o f em piricism i n th e u t i l i t a r i a n i s m of John S tu a rt M ill*

E volutionism , a new movement, b u t one

deeply ro o te d in B r i t i s h em piricism , began i t s phenomenal r i s e to p o p u la rity about th e m iddle of th e ce n tu ry a s th e r e s u l t o f th e combined work o f Darwin and Spencer*

T his was fo llo w ed by

a r e a c tio n a g a in s t th e e v o lu tio n a ry philosophy i n th e form of n e o -id e a lism , which, by th e tu r n o f th e ce n tu ry had e s ta b lis h e d I t s e l f as th e dominant philosophy i n G reat B rita in * Two o th e r movements, b o th o f them having t h e i r o r ig in in Germany, a f f e c te d th e o lo g ic a l th in k in g d u rin g t h i s period* B ib lic a l c r itic is m ch allen g ed th e t r a d i t i o n a l I n te r p r e ta t io n s o f th e B ib le and th e R its c h lia n theology ch a lle n g ed th e t r a d i ­ tio n a l th e o lo g ic a l views* I t was a p e rio d i n which th eism i n p h ilo so p h y and orthodoxy i n theolog y were on th e defensive*

CHAPTER I I I THE SCOTTISH SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY Thomas Reid (1710-96) i n th e l a t t e r h a l f o f th e e ig h te e n th ce n tu ry founded a school o f thought commonly known as th e Scot­ t i s h School, o r th e Philosophy o f Common Sense*

I t a ro se in

S co tlan d and i t s le a d in g r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s liv e d in Scotland*

It

began as a conscious o p p o sitio n to th e sohool o f e m p iric a l thought re p re s e n te d by B erkeley and Hume*

U n til i t began to d e c lin e i n

fa v o r and in flu e n c e i n th e l a t t e r h a lf of th e n in e te e n th oentury i t s le a d in g advocates were H eld, S tew art, Brown, Hamilton and Hansel* I*

Thomas R eid* Thomas Reid took th e p o s itio n of P ro fe s s o r of Moral P h ilo so ­

phy a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Glasgow i n 1764*

Seventeen y e a rs l a t e r

he r e t i r e d to com plete h is p h ilo s o p h ic a l system* Reid d is tin g u is h e d between Judgments o r n a tu re and Judgments based e i t h e r on ex p erien ce o r reason*

Judgments of n a tu re , accord­

in g to R eid, a re th e f i r s t p r in c ip le s upon which a l l reaso n in g re s ts *

"They n e c e s s a r ily r e s u l t from th e c o n s titu tio n o f our

fa c u ltie s " .1

They a r e "not grounded upon any an teced en t reason­

in g , b u t upon th e c o n s titu tio n Of th e mind i t s e l f " . ^

I t i s not

1* Thomas Reid, quoted by James S eth, E n g lish P h ilo so p h e rs and Schools o f P h ilo so p h y , p* 232* 2* Loo* o i t *

30

p o s s ib le to give them lo g ic a l p r o o f. g ra n te d I n th e b u s in e ss o f l i f e .

They must be ta k en f o r

They belong to "Common Sense

and R easo n ." "What a t bottom he I s m ain tain in g I s , t h a t l i f e I s more fundam ental th a n reason o r lo g ic ; t h a t our most inexpug­ n ab le b e l ie f s grow d ir e c tly out o f th e needs of l i f e , and a re n o t grounded upon argum ent, because arguments a re grounded upon them; and t h a t when th e case i s so, we a re only d is c r e d itin g philosophy by th e p re te n s e th a t i t i s not so , and t h a t c o n v ictio n i s to be made to w ait upon reaso n ed d em o n stratio n . B e l i e f , i n a word, i s p r i o r to re aso n in g , and su p p lie s it" wi'th i t s n ec essary m a te r ia l; * • ♦ • * II.

Dugald Stewart.

Even b efo re R e id 's d eath th e le a d e rs h ip o f th e school passed to Dugald Stew art (1753-1828) who occupied th e C hair o f Moral P hilosophy a t Edinburgh from 1785-1810.

Stew art agreed w ith

Reid i n th e main p o in ts o f h is p h ilo so p h y .

He attem p ted to

sy stem a tiz e h is m a s te r 's d o c trin e more th oroughly and to apply i t more e x te n s iv e ly .

He avoided th e use of th e term "common

sense" becau se, a s employed by R eid, i t had produced th e im pres­ sion t h a t q u e stio n s o f philosophy could be d ecid ed by an appeal to p o p u la r judgm ent.

He speaks in s te a d of "th e fundam ental laws

o f human b e l i e f , o r th e prim ary elem ents of human re a s o n " .4

He

th in k s o f them as assum ptions "• • • • n e c e s s a r ily and uncon­ s c io u s ly in v o lv ed i n . . . . "

th e e x e rc is e o f o u r f a c u l t i e s ; as

th e "• • • • n ecessary c o n d itio n s on which every ste p o f deductlo n t a c i t l y p ro cee d s". 5 He p o p u la riz e d th e p o s itio n s o f Reid and in tro d u c e d them 3 . A. K. Rogers, E n g lish and American P hilosophy Since 1800. p p .4 -5 . 4 . Cf. W. R. S o rle y l A H isto ry o f E n g lish P h ilo so p h y , p . 203. 5 . C f. R ogers, I b i d . , " p . 12.

31

to th e n in e te e n th c e n tu ry . III.

Thomas Brown. Thomas Brown (1778-1820) was S te w a rt's p u p il and l a t e r h is

su c c e sso r a t Edinburgh.

His p h ilo so p h ic p o s itio n re p re s e n ts

somewhat o f a compromise between th e l n t u l t i o n l s t view s o f Reid and th e o ld e r em piricism .

Thus h is views te n d to b rid g e th e gap

between th e p h ilo so p h y o f common sense and th e l a t e r em piricism of th e two U l l l s .

L ike Reid he adhered to th e assum ption of c e r­

t a i n i n t u i t i v e p r in c ip l e s o f b e l i e f , b u t h is views on c a u s a lity were more n e a rly l i k e th o se o f Hume, alth o u g h he r e je c te d Hume's 6 s k e p tic a l c o n c lu sio n s. 17.

W illiam H am ilton. The S c o ttis h philosophy g ain ed a new Im petus from W illiam

H amilton (1788-1856).

Under h i s le a d e rs h ip i t beoame f o r a tim e

th e forem ost o f th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l sc h o o ls.

H am ilton was P ro fe ss o r

o f L ogic and M etaphysics a t Edinburgh from 1836 u n t i l h is d e a th . The renewed p o p u la rity o f th e sohool was due I n p a r t to th e new e d itio n s o f R e id 's and S te w a rt's works which Ham ilton p rep ared and p u b lis h e d i n 1846 and 1854 r e p e c tiv e ly .

I n p a r t I t was due

to more o r ig in a l e f f o r t s of h is own. I n c e r ta in re s p e o ts H am ilto n 's views re p re s e n t an advance over R e id 's .

The th e o ry of knowledge w ith which he b e g in s I s

s im ila r to R e id 's .

A fundam ental p r in c ip le o f u n d ersta n d in g I s

t h a t I n p e rc e p tio n we apprehend e x te rn a l th in g s Im m ediately and 6 . C f. Rudolf M etz, A Hundred Y ears o f B r i t i s h P hilo so p h y , p . 31.

32

d ire c tly . c ip le .

We a re I n t u i t i v e l y c e r ta in of th e t r u t h o f t h i s p r in ­

The p o in t a t which he advances beyond Reid i s th a t he

reach es h is r e s u l t n o t m erely through an ap p eal to th e under­ sta n d in g of th e p la in man, h u t through a c r i t i c a l a n a ly s is o f th e p ro c e ss of knowledge. ■Common Sense", he say s, " Is l ik e Common Law. Bach may he l a i d down a s th e g e n e ra l r u le o f d e c isio n ; b u t in th e one case I t may be l e f t to th e J u r i s t , I n th e o th e r to th e p h ilo so p h e r, to a s c e r ta in what a re th e c o n te n ts o f th e ru le ; and though I n b o th In s ta n c e s th e oommon man may he c i t e d a s a w itn e ss, f o r th e custom o r th e f a c t , i n n e ith e r can he be allow ed to o f f i c i a t e as advocate o r as Ju d g e ." H am ilto n 's f a v o r ite d o c trin e was th a t o f th e r e l a t i v i t y o f human knowledge, from which he d e riv e d h is philosophy o f th e tinc o n d itio n e d .

For Hamilton th e g re a t le sso n o f Kant i s th e l e s ­

son o f our complete and in c u ra b le ignorance o f u ltim a te r e a l i t y . "To know i s to r e l a t e th in g s to th e mind; i t fo llo w s t h a t th e un­ r e l a t e d th in g , th e t h i n g - i n - i t s e l f , can n ev er he known.

We know

only phenomena; t h a t i s , we do n o t, i n th e s t r i c t e s t sense know at a ll."

Q

Moreover,

• th e re cannot be any knowledge of

th a t which i s w ith o u t c o n d itio n s , w hether I t i s c a lle d i n f i n i t e o r a b s o lu te ; knowledge l i e s between two c o n tra d ic to ry in c o n ceiv a b le s , one of which must he tr u e , though n e ith e r can he conceiv­ ed; a l l tr u e philosophy I s a philosophy o f th e c o n d itio n e d .

'To

t h i h k ', he says, ' i s to c o n d i tio n '." 9 H am ilton's p h ilo so p h y may be summarized by saying t h a t he attem p ted to re c o n c ile S c o ttis h and German th o u g h t, p a r tic u la r ly Reid and K ant.

H is work was n o t p rim a rily n o ta b le because he

7 . Quoted by S eth, oj>. o l t . . p . 300(. 8 . S eth , 0£ . o l t . . p . SOI. 9 . S o rle y , oj>. o l t . . p . 240.

33

worked o u t a s u c c e s s fu l sy n th e s is o f th e two p o s itio n s , b u t be­ cause he In tro d u ced German philosophy In to England.

He was

" . • • • th e f i r s t academic p h ilo so p h e r o f rank to open h is mind to th e In flu e n c e o f German Id e a s and th ereb y to tak e a d e c isiv e ste p In ending th e I n s u la r ity o f B r i t i s h th o u g h t." 10

The conse­

quences o f h is example were a l l th e g r e a te r because o f th e I n flu ­ ence he e x e rte d as th e head o f th e S c o ttis h school d u rin g h is two decades o f te a c h in g a t Edinburgh.

"• • • • H am ilto n 's cosmopoli­

ta n le a r n in g broke In upon B r i t i s h philosophy and l i f t e d I t out o f th e narrow grooves In to which b o th th e S c o ttis h academic te a c h e rs and th e E n g lish B entham ites had f a l l e n . " 11 V* Henry L. H ansel. The th e o lo g ia n Henry L. Mansel (1820-1871) I s th e b e s t known o f H am ilto n 's p u p ils .

O rdained a p r i e s t , he became L e c tu re r In

Theology a t Magdalen C ollege, l a t e r P ro fe ss o r o f E c c le s ia s tic a l H isto ry a t Oxford and f i n a l l y Dean o f S t. P a u l 's .

He In tro d u ced

H am ilto n 's philosophy to England and p o p u la riz e d i t a t Oxford. I n h is p u b lish ed works he attem p ted to sy stem atize H am ilto n 's p o s itio n s and to defend him a g a in s t c r itic is m s e s p e c ia lly a g a in s t M i l l 's a tta c k .

However, th e Bampton L ectu res on The L im its o f

R e lig io u s Thought (1858) a re h i s most I n f l u e n t i a l work.

I n th e se

le c tu r e s he a p p lie d H am ilton's p r in c ip le s to th e o lo g ic a l q u e s tio n s. Hamilton concluded th a t where knowledge i s a t ta i n a b le , b e l i e f i s b oth p o s s ib le and n e c e ssa ry .

He tr u s te d s u p e rn a tu ra l r e v e la tio n

to a id common sense and i n t u i t i o n In a s su rin g us o f th o se tr u th s 10. M etz, op. o l t . . p . 37. 11. S o rle y , op. o l t . , p . 236.

34

whloh l i e beyond th e sphere o f knowledge* " S ta r tin g w ith th e p r in c ip le o f th e r e l a t i v i t y o f knowledge, H ansel t r i e d to show th a t a l l o u r e f f o r t s to d is c o v e r by means o f thought an y th in g about th e a b s o lu te d iv in e n a tu re a re doomed to f a ilu r e * The a b s o lu te and I n f i n i t e a re com­ p l e t e l y In a c c e s s ib le to m an's f i n i t e understanding* • • • • I n m a tte rs o f f a i t h , thought I s com pletely Im potent and must I n th e end co n fess i t s bankruptcy* H ansel th e re fo r e d e c la re s t h a t a l l th e o r e tic arguments a g a in s t th e dogmas o f r e lig io n a re I n v a lid , and th u s r id s h im self I n th e q u ic k e st and sim­ p l e s t manner o f a l l th e enemies and contem ners o f f a ith * • • • • H ansel b a se s a l l our knowledge o f th e super-senuous upon d iv in e r e v e la tio n and th e so le ta s k which f a l l s upon th e c r i t i c a l re a so n In d ec id in g w hether to accep t or r e j e c t r e lig io u s dogmas I s n o t oonoerned w ith th e co n ten t o f th e dogmas b u t m erely w ith th e ,e v id e n c e s which can be adduced f o r t h e i r d iv in e o rig in * " H ansel, even more th a n Ham ilton, gave K a n t's th e o ry o f know­ led g e an a g n o stic tu r n and made i t serv e th e purposes o f re v e a le d r e lig io n *

He brought about a d e f in it e s e p a ra tio n between f a i t h

and knowledge, r e l i g i o n and philosophy* VI*

The D ecline o f th e S c o ttis h School* A f te r Hamilton and H ansel th e S c o ttis h philosophy d e c lin e d

ra p id ly *

T his d e c lin e was due la r g e ly to th e f a c t t h a t I t had to

contend w ith th r e e competing views*

In 1865 J . S* H ill c r i t i c i z e d

th e S c o ttis h in tu itio n a lis m from th e p o in t o f view of h i s em p irical u t i l i t a r i a n i s m i n h is Exam ination o f S ir W illiam H am ilto n 's P h ilo so ­ phy* Calderwood undertook th e defence o f th e S c o ttis h t r a d i t i o n , which had always been founded upon r e lig i o n , a g a in s t th e a tta c k o f th o se te n d e n c ie s I n Darwinism which were h o s t i l e to re lig io n * V e itc h t r i e d to v in d ic a te th e S c o ttis h p h ilo so p h y a g a in s t th e I d e a l i s t i c th e o rie s o f Kant and Hegel as th e y were given ex p res12* Cf* S eth, o^* o lb * , p* 303* 13* U etz, o£. o l t * . p p . 39-40*

I

35

slo n I n th e views o f men li k e Green and C a ird . "Although th e ' l a s t r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f th e school (M orell, M’Cosh, Thomas Spenoer Baynes, V eito h , and Calderwood) were s t i l l liv in g and working In th e 'e i g h t i e s and 'n i n e t i e s of th e l a s t c e n tu ry , th e S c o ttis h t r a d i t i o n cannot he s a id to be r e g u la rly m ain tain ed a f t e r th e e a rly 'se v e n tie s* Scot­ t i s h thought d is in te g r a te s o r p asses over In to o th e r more pow erful and new -fashioned s c h o o ls ." 14 S c o ttis h th o u g h t, a f t e r th e d is s o lu tio n o f th e S c o ttis h p h i­ losophy o f common sen se, was more la r g e ly tak en up and d iss o lv e d by th e Id ealism o f Neo-Hegellanlsm th an by any o th e r sc h o o l, a l ­ though no h i s t o r i c a l t r a n s i t i o n from th e form er to th e l a t t e r ever oocurred* V II.

The R e la tio n o f O rr to th e S c o ttis h School. O r r 's r e la tio n to th e S c o ttis h school may be n o ted I n p a r t

by comparing and c o n tra s tin g h is views w ith th o se of M ansel, sin ce b o th o f them a p p lie d m etaphysics to th e o lo g y . A.

O r r 's R e la tio n to M ansel.

The r e la tio n s h ip between t h e i r views I s p rim a rily one o f c o n t r a s t.

Uansel p r e f e r r e d to s e p a ra te f a i t h and knowledge,

w hile O rr deplored t h i s s e p a ra tio n .

O rr met and com batted t h i s

d i s t i n c t i o n between a r e lig io u s and a th e o r e tic view of th e world In th e R lts c h lla n th e o lo g y . O rr c r i t i c i z e d th e d o o trln e of a double t r u t h , th e one re ­ lig i o u s and th e o th e r p h ilo s o p h ic a l, by saying th a t "• • • • th e p ro p o sal to d iv id e th e house of th e mind In to two compartments, each o f which I s to be k ep t s a c re d ly a p a rt from th e o th e r, I s a p e r f e c tly I llu s o r y and u n te n ab le one. . . . . The same p ro cesses of thought which a re employed 1 4 . M etz, op. o l t . . p . 44.

i

36

In philosophy and scien ce a re im p lied in th e sim p lest a c t o f understanding* In l i k e manner, we may g ra n t t h a t th e r e i s a d i s t i n c t i o n o f c h a ra c te r and form - n o t to speak o f o r ig in between r e lig io u s and what may he c a lle d th e o r e tic knowledge; • • . • R e lig io n , a s su re d ly , i s n o t,a th e o r e tio a l product* I t d id n o t o r ig in a te in re aso n in g , h u t in an immediate p e r­ c e p tio n o r experience o f th e D ivine in some o f th e spheres o f itB n a tu r a l and su p e rn a tu ra l m a n ife sta tio n ; f o r th e re c e p tio n of which ag ain a n a tiv e c a p a c ity o f endowment must he presup­ posed i n th e human s p i r i t . " 15 While we have i n t h i s statem en t a t l e a s t an echo o f th e p h i­ losophy of common se n se , i t s a p p lic a tio n to th e problem s o f r e l i ­ gion i s v ery d i f f e r e n t .

I n O r r 's opin io n i t i s n o t to he conceded,

• t h a t th e re i s any n ecessary d iv o rce between th e mind i n i t s p r a c t i c a l and th e mind i n i t s th e o r e tic a l a c t i v i t i e s , so th a t p ro p o s itio n s may he affirm ed in th e one sphere which have no r e l a t i o n t o , can re c e iv e no c o rro b o ra tio n from , may even he c o n tra d ic te d by, p ro p o s itio n s affirm ed in th e other* Thus to t e a r asu n d er f a i t h and reaso n i s to re n d e r no se rv ic e to r e lig io n , b u t i s to pave th e way f o r th e o r e tio a l scepticism * I t i s i n t r u t h th e same reaso n which works in b o th spheres; th e r e s u l t s , th e r e f o r e , must be such as adm it o f com parison*Bl® T his r e f u s a l to allow a d is t in c t io n between f a i t h and reason^ r e lig i o n and p h ilo so p h y , has im p lic a tio n s f o r a com prehensive view o f God and th e w orld from th e C h ris tia n stan d p o in t* " C h r is tia n ity , i t i s g ra n te d , i s not a s c i e n t i f i c system , though, i f i t s view o f th e w orld be tr u e , i t must be recon­ c i l a b l e w ith a l l t h a t i s o e r ta in and e s ta b lis h e d i n th e re* s u i t s o f science* I t i s n o t a p h ilo so p h y , though, i f i t be v a l id , i t s fundam ental assum ptions w ill be found t o be in harmony w ith th e co n clu sio n s a t which sound re a so n , a tta c k ­ in g i t s own problem s, In dependently a r r i v e s . " 1 ' B.

O rr1s R e la tio n to R eid.

O r r 's p o s itio n w ith re g a rd to th e S c o ttis h school was n o t wholly one o f o p p o sitio n *

I n h is book David Hume (1903) he ex­

p re s s e s o c c a sio n a l agreement w ith t h e i r p o sitio n s*

Thus, w ith

15* James O rr, The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World, pp. 31-32* 16* I b id * , p* 34* 17* I b i d . , p . 9 .

37

re g a rd to Hume's sc e p tic ism concerning th e r e a l i t y , permanence and d i s t i n c t e x iste n c e of th e mind o r th e s e l f , he d e c la re s , "Reid, stan d in g on th e ground of common se n se, n a tu r a lly and j u s t l y regarded th e attem p t to d isp ro v e th e permanent r e a l i t y of a s e l f i n co n scio u sn ess as th e re d u c tlo ad absurdum of a l l p h i­ lo so p h y ." 18 At th e co n clu sio n o f th e ch a p ter on su b sta n c e , th e m a te ria l w orld, and th e ego O rr ex p resses fundam ental agreement w ith Reid In one o f h is b a s ic c o n c lu sio n s. "• • • • th e t r u t h of re a lis m . I s t h a t th e u n iv e rse , what­ e v e r I t may b e , I s s o m e th in g a c tu a l and Independent of man's In d iv id u a l co n scio u sn e ss. I t I s a s much a n o t h e r 's a s mine, and as r e a l f o r him as f o r me. I t ap p ears in our conscious­ n e s s , b u t I t i s more th an our c o n scio u sn e ss. I t s r e a l i t y i s not our knowledge of I t , w hatever may be I t s r e l a t i o n s to knowledge a b s o lu te ly . T his i s th e p o in t In which th e school of R eid I s im pregnable, and i n m ain ta in in g which I t d id i t s p e c u lia r s e r v ic e ." xa

1 8 . James O rr, David Hume, p p . 148-9. 1 9 . I b i d . , p f 164.

CHAPTER IV THE UTILITARIAN-EMPIRICAL SCHOOL OP PHILOSOPHY The philosophy which i s more ty p io a lly B r i t i s h th a n any o th e r i s th e one which I s c a lle d em piricism o r th e philosophy o f ex p e rien ce .

I t s course i s r e l a t i v e l y continuous from th e

R enaissance to th e p re s e n t day.

Throughout th e course o f i t s

h is to r y i t re p re s e n ts a s in g le b a s ic id e a and a t t i t u d e o f th o u g h t. "The p h ilo so p h ic li n e which s tr e tc h e s from Bacon and Hobbes to Locke, B erk eley , and Hume, and th en ce to Bentham, M ill, and Spencer, im p lie s a complex o f co h eren t and harmonious p r in c ip le s which tak e on a d if f e r e n t appearance according to th e sta n d p o in t from which th ey a re view ed, b u t always sta n d in r e l a t i o n to th e same t o t a l i t y . I f we w ish to fin d s u ita b le term s f o r t h i s t o t a l i t y in i t s main a s p e c ts , we must choose em piricism o r p o s itiv is m to show i t s g en e ra l p h ilo so p h ic p o s itio n , se n sa tio n a lism or phenomenalism i n r e ­ l a t i o n to i t s th e o ry o f knowledge, a s so c ia tio n ism i n r e l a ­ tio n to i t s psychology, hedonism, eudaemonlsm, o r u t i l i t l a r l anism in r e l a t i o n to i t s e t h ic s , sc e p tic ism o r ag n o sticism in r e la tio n to i t s m etaphysics, deism o r in d lf f e r e n tis m (o c c a s io n a lly a ls o atheism ) in r e la tio n to r e lig i o n , l i b e r a l ­ ism in r e l a t i o n to p o l i t i c s . * 1 There i s a b reak in th e l i n e 'o f development of B r i t i s h em­ p iric is m a f t e r i t re a c h e s p erh ap s i t s h ig h e s t p o in t i n Hume.

T his

break was made by R eid and th e S c o ttis h school a g a in s t Hume.

The

p ro g re ss o f th e t r a d i t i o n a l em piricism was h a lte d f o r a tim e by t h i s a tta o k , b u t i t began i t s forw ard movement ag ain when i t r e ­ ceived an in f lu x o f new id e a s i n Bentham 's p h ilo so p h y .

During

th e n in e te e n th ce n tu ry th e se r i v a l schools engaged i n a c o n f lic t which la s t e d t i l l th e famous a tta o k of J . S. M ill upon Hamilton 1 . Metz, A Hundred Y ears of B r i t i s h P hilosophy, p . 47.

39

In 1865 and em piricism was f i n a l l y v ic to r io u s . The o h le f r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f l a t e r em piricism a re Jeremy Bentham, James M ill and John S tu a rt M ill.?

These th re e men embodied

th e h e r ita g e o f th e B r i t i s h t r a d i t i o n and were c h ie f ly re sp o n sib le f o r c a rry in g th e movement forw ard. 1.

Jeremy Bentham. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) I s th e e a r l i e s t re p r e s e n ta tiv e o f

modern em piricism . u tilita ria n is m .

He i s th e founder o f th e e th ic a l, system of

His c o n trib u tio n s a re e x c lu s iv e ly i n th e f i e l d

o f p r a c t i c a l p h ilo so p h y .

He a p p lie d h is p r in c ip le s to p o l i t i c s ,

s o c ia l reform , l e g i s l a t i o n , Ju risp ru d en c e, in te r n a tio n a l law and e d u c a tio n . Bentham*s watchword was " U til ity " , and h is m otto, "th e g r e a t­ e s t h ap p in ess o f th e g r e a te s t number".

He contends th a t man has

no n a tu r a l r i g h t s , b u t th a t a l l h is r i g h t s a re given to him by law .

The o r ite r io n by which th e goodness of law i s Judged i s th e

degree i n which i t s observance p ro v id es f o r th e g en e ra l h ap p in ess. The tr u e id e a l o f democracy he f in d s in th e p r in c ip le of u t i l i t y . I t i s th e exact o p p o site of a l l i n t e r e s t s narrow er th an th e gen­ e r a l w e lf a r e .o f r th e community.

I t e s p e c ia lly condemns a l l "S in i­

s t e r i n t e r e s t s " - p r iv a te and c la s s i n t e r e s t s th a t a re h o s t i l e to th e g e n e ra l w e lfa re .

He a s s e r ts th a t every in d iv id u a l has an e-

qual claim to h a p p in e ss.

The sta n d a rd of b o th p r iv a te and p u b lio

conduct i s th e g e n e ra l h ap p in ess.

The moral q u a lity of an a c t i s

determ ined by an ex act c a lc u la tio n o f th e consequences o f our ac 2 . The e v o lu tio n is t r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s w ill be d e a lt w ith i n th e n ex t s e c tio n .

40

t io n i s th e only su e o e ssfu l guide to r ig h t conduct" w hether i t r e s u l t s i n p le a su re o r p a in .

The p ro p er e t h ic a l a t t i t u d e i s one

o f c a lc u la tio n - c o n sid erin g th e p le a s u ra b le and p a in fu l conse­ quences o f a l te r n a ti v e consequences o f a c tio n and d ec id in g f o r th e one which shows th e most fa v o ra b le b alan ce of p le a s u ra b le consequences.

The most v irtu o u s man i s th e one who c a lc u la te s

most s u c c e s s fu lly . Bentham thought th e c a lc u la tio n o f consequences was capable o f talcing m athem atical form

and acco rd in g ly

donic c a lc u lu s" f o r th e purpose

c o n s tru c te d a "he­

o f a ffo rd in g a s c i e n t i f i c guide

to conduct. ■We must ta k e account, n o t only of th e in te n s it y and dura­ tio n o f each p le a s u re , b u t a ls o o f i t s c e r ta in ty , p ro p in ­ q u ity , fe c u n d ity or f r u it f u ln e s s in f u r th e r p le a s u r e s , and i t s p u r ity o f b arren n ess i n palhffcH consequences. The en­ t i r e c a lc u la tio n i s , of co u rse, i n term s o f q u a n tity ; th e end i s th e p ro d u ctio n of th e maximum o f p o s s ib le p le a s u re and th e minimum o f p o s s ib le p a in ." 4 Bentham*s id e a s were ea g erly re c e iv e d by a group o f e n th u si­ a s t i c p u p ils who e d ite d h is works, commented upon and b ro ad ca st h is view s, a p p lie d them i n v a rio u s spheres of p r a c t ic a l l i f e , c o n s tru c te d them in to a p o l i t i c a l program, and e s ta b lis h e d a po­ l i t i c a l p a r t known as "p h ilo so p h ic r a d ic a ls " .

Thus h is d o c trin e s

e n te re d P arliam en t and in flu e n c e d l e g i s l a t i v e refo rm s. II.

James M ill. P assin g over such men as Godwin, R icardo and M althus, we

tu r n n ex t to James M ill (1773-1856) through whom th e main stream 3 . C f. James S eth, E n g lish P h ilo so p h ers and Sohools o f P h ilo so ­ phy. p p . 241-2. 4 . S eth , i b i d . , p . 242.

41

o f u t i l i t a r i a n th o u g h t co n tin u ed to flow .

Metz says o f him t h a t ,

"He forms a b rid g e from th e refo u n d er of em piricism to I t s com­ p l e t e r : from Bentham to h is own son John S tu a rt M i l l . H e took th e d o c trin e s o f Bentham, h is f r ie n d and a l l y , and handed them on to h is soh.

Though Bentham was th e head o f th e "p h ilo so p h ic

r a d ic a ls " , M ill was th e le a d in g s p i r i t o f th e p a r ty . A nother se rv ic e which he perform ed f o r th e school was to p ro v id e a p sy c h o lo g ica l fo u n d atio n f o r th e d o c trin e of u t i l i ­ ta ria n is m .

He d e riv e d t h i s fo u n d atio n from th e a s s o c ia tio n -

psychology o f th e o ld e r c l a s s i c a l em piricism .

M ill shaped h is

psychology along th e li n e s o f Hume and H a rtle y , p a r t i c u l a r l y th e l a t t e r and In d i r e c t o p p o sitio n to th e ln tu itio n ls m o f th e S c o ttis h sch o o l.

"He • • • • re v iv e d th e law o f a s s o c ia tio n as

th e b a s ic law o f p sy c h ic l i f e and th e phenom enalist view o f th e th eo ry o f knowledge . . . ."

fi

As Bentham had ren o v ated th e

p r a c t i c a l , so M ill ren o v ated th e th e o r e tic a l a s p e c ts o f o la s s lo B r i t i s h em piricism . III.

John S tu a rt M ill. P a ssin g o ver th e work o f men l i k e A u stin , George G rote,

H erschel and Uhewell, we come to John S tu a rt M ill (1806-73) th e g r e a te s t em p irical th in k e r o f th e n in e te e n th c e n tu ry . M i l l 's philosophy i s deeply ro o te d I n t r a d i t i o n o f B r i t i s h p h ilo so p h y .

His I s th e l a s t g r e a t sy n th e s is o f em piricism .

"As

an assumed p o sse ssio n he f i r s t ta k e s over In fcthics th e u t i l i ­ ta ria n is m o f Bentham, i n psychology and th e o ry o f knowledge th e 5 . Metz, op. d t . . p p . 57-8. 6 . M etz, op. c l t . , p . 59.

42

d o c trin e s o f h is f a th e r , I n p o l i t i c a l economy th e th e o r ie s of M althus and R icardo, in m etaphysics and r e lig i o n th e a g n o s ticism which was common to them a l l . " 7 True to th e e m p iric a l t r a d i t i o n , he found h im self opposed to th e Q-erman and S c o ttis h sc h o o ls.

Metz g iv e s a c l e a r s t a t e ­

ment o f what he d id n o t stan d f o r . "Thus th e whole philosophy o f h is age p re s e n ts I t s e l f to him under th e s in g le a sp e c t o f a te n s io n between th e Q-erm an -S co ttish and th e B r i t i s h group, o r between th e tr a n s ­ cen d en tal philosophy of K ant, th e common-sense th e o ry of R eid, and H am ilto n 's d o c trin e which sprang from t h e i r union on th e one sid e and em piricism on th e o th e r . He f in d s him­ s e l f c o n tin u a lly in c o n f lic t w ith ev ery th in g which does n o t sp rin g from ex perience and cannot be v e r i f i e d th ro u g h ex­ p e rie n c e ; a g a in s t in n a te id e a s , a p r i o r i tr u th s , and in ­ t u i t i v e c e r t a i n t i e s , w hether i n knowledge or e th ic s o r any­ where e l s e ." M i l l 's polem ic a g a in s t Hamilton, th e Exam ination of S ir W illiam H am ilto n 's P h ilo so p h y . (1865) i s a thorough exam ination o f th e r i v a l p h ilo so p h ie s o f em piricism and I n tu itio n a lis m which ended th e c o n f lic t between th e two sch o o ls w ith a v ic to ry f o r em piri­ cism . A.

M i l l 's E th ic s .

M i l l 's e th ic s re p re s e n ts an advance o v er Bentham*s i n two r e s p e c ts .

He so fte n e d th e extreme in d iv id u a lism o f th e school

by p u ttin g more emphasis on th e s o c ia l a sp e c t o f conduct and he in tro d u c e d a q u a l ita tiv e element in to th e measurement o f p le a s u re . M ill avoid s th e appearance o f mean p r u d e n tia l s e lf is h n e s s by p u t­ t i n g more s tr e s s th a n h is p red ec esso rs upon th e sym pathetic p le a s ­ u re s . 7> I M d >, ~pY &Sr. 8 • ?5iLcL»} p • 68 •

43

"M o rality ", he sa y s, " c o n s is ts in c o n s c ie n tio u s sh rin k in g from th e v io la tio n o f m oral r u le s ; and th e b a s is o f t h i s co n s c ie n tio u s sentim ent i s th e s o c ia l f e e lin g s o f mankind; th e d e s ire to be in u n ity w ith our fe llo w c r e a tu r e s , which i s a lre a d y a pow erful p r in c ip le in human n a tu re , and hap­ p i l y one o f th o se which te n d to becomeQs tro n g e r from th e in flu e n c e s o f advancing c iv iliz a tio n .* ® Bentham measured p le a su re only in term s of q u a n tity .

M ill

In clu d e d a q u a l ita tiv e d iffe re n c e by e stim a tin g p le a s u re s ac­ cord in g to t h e i r h ig h e r o r low er v a lu e .

The p le a s u re s o f th e

mind a re h ig h e r and more v a lu a b le th an th o se of th e body.

A

p le a s u re o f a h ig h e r k in d of v a lu e can outweigh a g r e a te r quan­ t i t y o f a p le a s u re o f a low er k in d .

A man may be co n sid ered to

p o sse ss a h ig h e r m oral c h a ra o te r i f th e h ig h e r ty p es o f p le a su re a re more f u l l y developed i n him th a n th e lo w er. M ill p r e f e r s to speak o f th e w elfare o f mankind I n s te a d of th e g r e a te s t hap p in ess o f th e g r e a te s t number; he says more about duty and c h a ra c te r th an about h appiness and u t i l i t y ; he r a t e s th e e t h ic a l worth of a man more h ig h ly th an mere e f f o r t to o b ta in p le a s u re ; and he p la n ts th e e t h ic a l id e a l i n th e a ll-r o u n d and harmonious development o f p e r s o n a lity .^ 0 B.

M i l l 's L ogic.

M i l l 's lo g ic i s a s t r i c t and comprehensive a p p lic a tio n o f th e p r in c ip le s o f em piricism .

He i s of th e o p in io n th a t th e

m ental s tu d ie s can only be made s c i e n t i f i c i f th e procedure of m ental sc ien c e i s reg ard ed as s t r i c t l y p a r a l l e l to th a t o f natu ­ r a l s c ie n c e .

He claim s th a t l o g ic a l axioms and m athem atical

p ro p o s itio n s a re n o th in g b u t in d u c tio n s from e x p e rien ce . 9Z

"We

Quoted by Henry S tu r t, U tilita r ia n is m , E ncyclopaedia B r lta n n lc a , 1 1 th E d itio n , V ol. 27, p . 822. 10. C f. Metz, op. o l t . . p . 73.

44

see no reaso n to 1)611676 th a t th e re can he any o b je c t o f our knowledge, whether our ex perience or what may be I n f e r r e d from our ex p erien ce by analogy, o r t h a t th e re l a any Id e a , f e e lin g , o r power In th e human mind which needs f o r I t s J u s t i f i c a t i o n and I t s o r ig in to be r e f e r r e d to any o th e r source th a n e x p e rie n c e ." 11 What A r i s to tle d id f o r th e syllogism and deductive lo g ic , M ill d id f o r in d u c tiv e lo g ic and th e method o f experim ental s c ie n c e .

I t I s to M i l l 's c r e d i t th a t though he I n s is te d on th e

In d u c tiv e b a s is of a l l s c i e n t i f i c e x p la n a tio n , he reco g n ized th e ln d ls p e n s a b lllty o f th e d ed u ctiv e method In a complete method of s c ie n c e . According to M ill, sin ce th e aim o f a l l s c i e n t i f i c in v e s ti­ g a tio n I s th e d isco v ery of th e c a u sa l r e la tio n s o f phenomena, what we need I s a guide f o r th e d e te c tio n o f th e se c a u s a l r e l a ­ ti o n s .

To meet t h i s need he fo rm u lates f iv e g u id in g methods -

th e method o f agreem ent, th e method of d if fe re n c e , th e double method o f agreement and d if fe re n c e , th e method of r e s id u e s , and th e method of concom itant v a r ia tio n s . These d ir e c t methods o f o b se rv a tio n and experim ent can be a p p lie d only in th e sim p ler c a se s of ca u sal co n n ectio n . d u c tiv e method must be a p p lie d In more complex c a se s .

The de­ I t con­

s i s t s of th r e e o p e ra tio n s - In d u c tio n , r a tio c in a t io n , and v e r i­ fic a tio n . IT I

Quoted by Metz, o£. c l t . , p . 7 0 -1 . Of. Seth, oj). o l t . . p . 262. 12. C f. S eth, I b i d . . p . 264. C f. a ls o R. B. P e rry , Philosophy of th e R eceriE T ast. pp. 55-6, who om its th e double method.

45

C.

M i l l Views on R e lig io n .

M i l l 's Essays on R e lig io n were p u b lish e d a f t e r h is d ea th . I n th e essay on th e U t i l i t y of R e lig io n he arg u es th a t th e Re­ lig i o n o f Humanity I s b o th s u f f i c i e n t and equal to th e b e s t of th e su p e rn a tu ra l r e l i g i o n s , sin c e I t ad eq u ately embodies th e essence o f re lig io n * "The essence o f r e lig io n I s th e stro n g and e a rn e st d ir e c tio n o f th e emotions and d e s ir e s tow ards an id e a l o b je c t, recog­ n iz e d as of th e h ig h e s t e x c e lle n c e , and as r i g h t f u l l y para­ mount over a l l s e l f i s h o b je c ts o f d e s ir e . T his c o n d itio n I s f u l f i l l e d by th e R e lig io n of Humanity I n as eminent a d eg ree, and In as h igh a sen se, as by th e su p e rn a tu ra l re ­ lig io n s even in t h e i r b e s t m a n ife s ta tio n s , and f a r more so th a n In any o f t h e i r o th e r s ." Seth f u r th e r I n t e r p r e t s M ill a s d e c la rin g th a t th e c h a r a c te r i s tic tendency o f su p e rn a tu ra lism i s to a r r e s t th e development of both th e i n t e l l e c t u a l and th e m oral n a tu re ; th a t i t ste re o ty p e s mo­ r a l i t y ; and th a t i t ap p eals to s e l f - i n t e r e s t r a th e r th a n to d is­ i n te r e s te d and id e a l m o tiv e s.145 I n th e essay on Theism he r e j e c t s th e argument f o r a F i r s t Cause on th e b a s is t h a t th e re i s a permanent element i n n a tu re , "• • • . a s f a r as an y th in g can be concluded from human ex p e rien ce . Force has a l l th e a t t r i b u t e s of a th in g e te r n a l and u n c re a te d ." 15 I n d is c u s s in g w hether o r n o t th e p r in c ip le o f th e s u rv iv a l of th e f i t t e s t i s in c o n s is te n t w ith c r e a tio n , M ill concludes th a t "• . • . i t must be allow ed t h a t , in th e p re s e n t s t a t e o f our knowledge, th e a d a p ta tio n s i n N ature a f f o rd a la rg e b a la n c e of p r o b a b ility in fav o u r o f c r e a tio n by i n t e l l i g e n c e ." 16 15 . 14. 15. 16 .

J . S. M ill quoted by S eth , i b i d . , p . 275. C f. lo o . cil*. M ill, quoted by S eth , i b i d . , p . 276. Quoted by S eth, i b i d . , p . 277.

"The in d l-

46

o a tio n g iv en by such evidence a s th e re i s , p o in ts to th e c re a ­ ti o n , n o t indeed of th e u n iv e rs e , b u t of th e p re s e n t o rd e r of i t , by an I n t e l l i g e n t Mind, whose power over th e m a te r ia ls was n o t a b s o lu te , whose lo v e f o r h is c r e a tu r e s was n o t h is s o le a c tu a tin g inducem ent, but who n e v e rth e le s s d e s ire d t h e i r good." 17 As to im m o rtality th e re i s no evidence on e i th e r side* p o s s ib le b u t extrem ely improbable*^®

M iracles a re

The p ro p e r a t t i t u d e to as­

sume on th e se q u e stio n s i s t h a t of scep ticism r a th e r th a n e ith e r b e l i e f o r atheism , beoause w hile th e re i s evidence amounting to a low degree o f p r o b a b ility , i t i s in s u f f i c i e n t f o r p ro o f. IV*

A lexander B ain* Although u tllita r ia n - e m p lr ic ls m reached i t s clim ax i n J* S*

M ill, th e tr a d i t i o n s o f th e school were k ep t up by men l i k e Thomas Fowler (1832-1904), G. 0* R obertson (1842-92), James S u lly (1842-1923), Henry Sidgwick (1838-1900) and C arveth Read (1848-1931)*

However, to b rin g th e u t i l i t a r i a n movement to a

p o in t where i t i s contemporary w ith Orr i t i s n ecessary only to c o n sid e r th e work o f A lexander B ain (1818-1903). B ain, l i k e th e M ills , was o f S c o ttis h o rig in *

He h e ld th e

p ro fe s s o rs h ip o f lo g ic in th e U n iv e rsity o f Aberdeen from 1860 to 1880*

Thus f o r th e f i r s t tim e th e newer em piricism was re p re ­

se n ted on th e f a c u lty o f one o f th e le a d in g u n i v e r s i t i e s , where­ as th e le a d e r s o f th e S c o ttis h school had c o n s is te n tly h e ld such academic p o s itio n s , and th e new school o f id e a lism was a lre a d y beginning to do so* 17* Loc* c l t * 18* C f. James O rr, David Hume, p* 213*

47

B a in 's most im p o rtan t c o n trib u tio n s were i n th e f i e l d o f psychology and h is c h ie f s e rv ic e was to g iv e em p irical psychology a more modern and p ro g re s siv e turn* h is p re d e c e ss o rs.

He was more s c i e n t i f i c th an

H is views form a connecting lin k between th e

a sso c ia tio n !sm of th e M ills and th e s c i e n t i f i c and e v o lu tio n a ry philosoph y of H erb ert Spencer*

He attem p ted to tra c e a l l th o se

id e a s which o th e rs co n sid ered to be i n t u i t i v e and which were a t t r i b u t e d to some o r ig in a l f a c u lty o f th e mind, to t h e i r common source i n experience and a s so c ia tio n * One of th e most i n t e r e s t i n g th in g s i n h is u t i l i t a r i a n e th ic s i s h is e x p lan atio n o f co n scien ce.

Law, by means o f o f f i c i a l

J u d ic ia l a c ts , and s o c ie ty , by means o f u n o f f ic ia l ex p ressio n s o f d isa p p ro v a l and ex clu sio n from s o c ia l good o f f ic e s , e x e rts s o c ia l p re ss u re on th e in d iv id u a l. tw o -fo ld r e s u l t .

This s o c ia l p re ssu re has a

I t en fo rces a type o f conduct s o c ia lly approved,

and i t develops in th e mind of th e In d iv id u a l su b je cte d to i t a sense o f duty, o r co n scien ce, which adds i t s own p re s s u re to th a t which comes from w ith o u t.

Conscience i s th u s ". • * . an

id e a l resem blance o f p u b lic a u th o r ity , growing up i n th e in d iv i­ dual mind, and working to th e same end. "A ll th a t we u n d erstan d by th e a u th o rity of c o n sc ie n c e , th e sentim en t o f o b lig a tio n , th e f e e lin g o f r i g h t , th e s ti n g o f rem orse - can be n o th in g e ls e th an so many modes o f expres­ sin g th e a c q u ire d av ersio n and dread tow ards c e r t a in a c tio n s a s s o c ia te d in th e mind w ith th e consequences now sta te d * • • • • The d read o f a n tic ip a te d e v il o p e ra tin g to r e s t r a i n b e fo re th e f a c t , and th e p a in r e a liz e d a f t e r th e a c t has been perform ed, a re p e r f e c tly I n t e l l i g i b l e p ro d u cts of th e edu catio n o f th e mind under a system o f a u th o rity , and of experien ce o f th e good and e v il consequences o f a c tio n s ." 19 . Quoted by S eth, i b i d ; , p . 283. 20. Loc. o l t .

48

The c h ild has a s la v is h conscience which develops i n th e a d u lt to a c i tiz e n conscience which reg ard s th e I n te n t and mean­ in g of th e law and n o t merely th e f a c t th a t i t has been p re ­ sc rib e d by some power. V.

The R e latio n o f James Orr to th e U tlllta r la n -E m p lr io a l School. The r e la tio n o f O rr to th e school o f Bentham and th e M ills

i s expressed i n h is book David Hume (1903) i n which he tr a c e s Hume's in flu e n c e on philosophy and th e o lo g y .

I n tra o in g th e in ­

flu en c e of Hume he follow ed th e p r in c ip le of s e le c tin g c e r ta in re p r e s e n ta tiv e a u th o rs and sc h o o ls.

He s e le c te d J . S. M ill and

Bain a s prom inent a s s o c ia tlo n a lis t s and a ls o s e le c te d J . S. M ill to re p re s e n t U tilita r ia n is m i n e t h i c s . While Orr i s n o t b lin d t o Hume's good p o in ts and r e a d ily g iv e s c r e d it where he th in k s c r e d i t i s due, on th e whole he i s c r i t i c a l o f Hume's p o s itio n and o f th e e m p iric a l school i n gen­ e ra l.

He d e a ls s p e c if ic a lly w ith Hume's views on th e f i r s t

p r in c ip le s o f knowledge, cause and e f f e c t , f re e w ill, su b stan ce, th e m a te ria l w orld, th e ego, m o rals, and theology and t h e i r in ­ flu e n c e . I n c r i t i c a l l y examining th e s e view s, Orr o c c a sio n a lly tak es advantage o f and a g re e s w ith th e c r itic is m s o f R eid and Hamilton o f th e S c o ttis h sc h o o l, b u t more g e n e ra lly he adopts th e views o f Kant and w ith g r e a te r em phasis.

Sometimes he p asses Judgment on

K a n t's c r itic is m s and fre q u e n tly o f fe rs h is own Independent ev al­ u a tio n .

49

A.

Orr* s R e la tio n to th e E m p irical Theory o f Knowledge* I n e v a lu a tin g Hume's th eo ry of Knowledge O rr r a i s e s what he

c o n sid e rs a c r u c ia l q u estio n - " Is t h i s c o n s tru c tio n o f knowledge w ithout a conscious th in k in g p r in c ip le to u n ite and combine th e v a rio u s p a r ts o f th a t knowledge p o ss ib le ? " ^ 1

He reminds us th a t

b o th R eid and Kant a s s a ile d th e account given by Hume o f th e n a tu re o f knowledge, b u t th a t Kant a ls o had a deeper way of a t ­ ta ck in g th e problem* "He goes back from th e n a tu re to th e more fundam ental ques­ tio n o f th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f knowledge, and la y s down as s e lf - e v id e n t th e p ro p o s itio n th a t th e re can be no knowledge o f any k in d except on the su p p o sitio n o f a p r in c ip le o f s y n th e s is in consciousness - of a r e l a t i o n of 'Im p ressio n s and I d e a s ' (to use Hume's p h rase) to a c e n tr a l 's e l f '* 'The "I t h i n k " ', in h is (K a n t's) own words, 'accom panies a l l my r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s '* " ^ He a ls o In clu d e s J* 3* M ill in h is c r iti c is m by q u o tin g h is statem en t on th e u ltim a te n a tu re o f memory*

"Our b e l i e f i n th e

v e r a c ity of memory i s e v id e n tly u ltim a te ; no reaso n can be given f o r i t which does n o t presuppose th e b e l i e f , and assume i t to be 23 w ell founded." O rr observes th a t t h i s statem en t in v o lv e s an im p o rtan t p r in c ip le - "That i s u ltim a te i n knowledge f o r which no reaso n can be given which does n o t presuppose th e th in g to be ex p lain ed * "24 M oreover, he e x p la in s th a t what M ill g r a n ts i s tr u e of memory, Kant shows to be tr u e of a l l s e n s ib le experience* * * . th e re a re c e r ta in th in g s in v o lv ed in i t which can Sever be e x p la in e d by th e ex p erien ce, because th e exper­ ie n c e i t s e l f presupposes them* And most fundam ental o f a l l i s t h i s c o n d itio n , th a t im p ressio n s can only become im pres­ s io n s f o r me i f th ey e x i s t to g e th e r i n a common s e lf- c o n sclousness* I know a th in g in co nsciousness only a s I r e ­ 21* 22* 23. 24*

James O rr, David Hume, p* 112* hoc* d t * I b i d . , p . 113. Loo* c l t .

50

l a t e i t w ith o th e r elem ents o f co n scio u sn ess to m y se lf* S e lf-c o n sc io u sn e ss , In o th e r words, w ith a l l th a t i t in v o lv e s , I s an u ltim a te f a c t , and any attem p t to e x p la in i t by th e ohem istzy o f a s s o c ia tio n , i s a case o f c irc le - re a s o n in g o f th e most g la r in g k in d .1,25 Here we see t h a t O rr's view i s i n fundam ental o p p o s itio n to th e a s so c la tio n ls m of th e e m p irical sc h o o l.

I n c id e n ta lly i t shows

h is dependence on K ant. B.

O rr1s R e la tio n to th e U t i l i t a r i a n Theory of E th io s . O rr a ls o p u ts th e u t i l i t a r i a n th e o ry of e th ic s to th e t e s t

and examines i t s b a s ic conception th a t good i s a synonym o f p le a s ­ u re , - th e view o f Hobbes, Locke, Bentham, M ill and Spencer, as w ell a s o f Hume.

He r a is e s th e q u estio n w hether p le a s u re i s a

p o s s ib le moral end f o r a r a tio n a l b ein g and d ecid es i t i n th e n e g a tiv e .

" I t i s i n th e n a tu re o f th in g s im p o ssib le , th e r e f o r e ,

th a t such a being should n o t s e t b e fo re him ends o th e r and h ig h er 26 th an p le a s u r e ." Moreover, even i f p le a s u re were a p o s s ib le so le m oral end f o r a r a tio n a l b e in g , Orr d en ies th a t

i t would be

a worthy end. I f th e u t i l i t a r i a n chooses to d is tin g u is h between th e h ig h er and low er p le a s u re s a s J . S. M ill d id , O rr claim s th a t a new in c o n siste n c y i s in tro d u c e d in to th e system . "For o b v io u sly , a s soon as we have in tro d u c e d th e elem ent of q u a lity in to p le a s u r e s , we r a i s e a new q u e stio n , - th a t of sta n d a rd or i d e a l . How e ls e a re we to determ ine which p le a s ­ u re s a re h ig h and which low : which men ought to choose, and which they ought to d e sp ise and r e je c t? R e fle c tio n w ill show t h a t , in a n o th e r r e s p e c t, whenever we in tro d u c e th e id e a of s c a le in to p le a s u r e s , th e problem i s e n t ir e ly changed. The p le a s u re s we p la c e h ig h e r i n th e s c a le - i n t e l l e c t u a l p le a s ­ u r e s , e . g . , o r moral p le a s u re s - cease to be mere p le a s u re s ; £5. Loo, c l t . 26. I b i d . , p . 186.

th e y a re r e s u l t s , r e f le x e s , accompaniments, of th e h ig h e r e n e rg ie s which g iv e r i s e to them, and th ey d e riv e t h e i r d ig n ity and ex c ellen ce s o le ly from th ese* I t I s th e o b je c ts o f th e en e rg ie s which a re th e ends, n o t th e p le asu res* Take th e case of benevolence - th e d is i n te r e s t e d seeking o f an­ o t h e r 's w e lfa re ................. P le a su re I n th e n a tu re o f th e case, I s th e p le a su re o f th e p erso n ex p erien cin g I t , n o t o f th e p erso n c o n fe rrin g I t , or o f th e mere s p e c ta to r * The w ell­ d o er may d e riv e p le a s u re from h is benevolence, o r from see­ in g th e hap p in ess of o th e rs ; b u t th a t p le a s u re i s n o t th e m otive o f h is actio n * The good to which h is a c tio n i s d i­ r e c te d I s not h i s own good, b u t th e good o f a n o th e r. P leas­ u r e , in th e sense of an 'a g re e a b le s e n s a tio n ' to him , i s not h i s end, n o t th e th in g he d e s ir e s , o r which moves h is w ill* To re s o lv e th e motive of benevolence in to p le a s u re d eriv ed from i t by th e d o er, I s to deny i t s d is in te r e s te d p c h a r a c te r , and to reduce I t to a f i n e r form of s e l f i s h n e s s . 1'

CHAPTER V THE EVOLUTIONARY-NATURALIST SCHOOL OP PHILOSOPHY During th e f i r s t tw o -th ird s of th e n in e te e n th ce n tu ry th e dominant f e a tu re of B r iti s h philosophy was th e antagonism between th e S c o ttis h school and th e t r a d i t i o n a l e m p ir ic is ts .

Even b efo re

th e l a t t e r gained th e supremacy a new fo rc e began to e x e rt a pow erful in flu e n c e , namely, th e d o c trin e s o f Darwin and Spencer. T his movement was in tim a te ly connected w ith and deeply ro o te d In th e t r a d i t i o n a l B r i t i s h em piricism .

The two li n e s o f thought

c ro ss and re c ro ss to such an e x te n t th a t no sharp l i n e o f d is ­ t i n c t i o n can be drawn between them.

The b a s is f o r a s s ig n in g a

th in k e r to th e e v o lu tio n is t school depends on th e predominance o f th e new im pulse i n h is p h ilo so p h y . As a sp e c u la tiv e h y p o th e sis th e Id ea o f ev o lu tio n was pro­ posed a s e a rly as th e f i f t h cen tu ry b efo re C h r is t, and i t had r e ­ ceiv ed th e q u a lif ie d indorsem ent o f many eminent a u t h o r it ie s In succeeding e ra s .

In th e cen tu ry p reced in g Darwin th e view gath­

ered fo rc e b o th from th e s p e c u la tio n s of p h ilo so p h e rs and th e o b se rv a tio n s of b i o l o g i s t s .

The g r e a t im petus, however, came

from Spencer, in th e f i e l d o f p h ilo so p h y , and from Darwin, In the f i e l d of th e s p e c ia l sc ie n c e s . I.

C harles Darwin. C harles Darwin (1809-82) gave to th e id e a o f e v o lu tio n a

53

trem endous in flu e n c e through h is epoch-making O rigin of Species (1859).

Darwin n ev er assumed th e r o le o f a p h ilo so p h e r h u t re ­

mained throughout h is l i f e an in v e s tig a to r o f th e phenomena o f p la n t and animal l i f e .

N ev e rth e le ss, he was aware o f th e revo­

lu tio n a r y e f f e c t h is th eo ry would have on th e d isc u ss io n o f p h i­ lo s o p h ic a l q u e s tio n s. The fundam ental elem ents o f h is d o c trin e a re n a tu r a l s e le c ­ tio n , th e s tru g g le f o r e x is te n c e , a d a p ta tio n to environm ent, th e in h e rita n c e of fa v o ra b le c h a ra c te rs , th e m u ta b ility o f th e sp ecies and th e anim al o r ig in of man.

Most o f th e se p r in c ip le s had been

propounded in e a r l i e r re s e a rc h and s p e c u la tio n .

D arw in's p e c u lia r

accomplishment i s th a t he g ath ered a l l th e se f a c to r s to g e th e r in ­ to a s in g le u n it and p re se n te d them as an ex p la n a tio n of th e o r ig in and development of liv i n g c r e a tu r e s . The s ta r t in g p o in t o f D arw in's th eo ry i s th e f a c t of v a r ia ­ tio n among th e in d iv id u a ls of th e same s p e c ie s , o r among members o f a g e n e ra tio n w ith a common a n c e s try .

The b re e d e r i s f a m ilia r

w ith t h i s f a c t and u se s i t to Improve h is s to c k .

Animals and

p la n ts i n a s t a t e o f n a tu re e x h ib it a s im ila r v a r i a b i l i t y .

Some

o f th e se v a r ia tio n s b e t t e r serv e th e needs o f th e organism than o th e rs , so th a t some a re b e t t e r s u ite d to th e circu m stan ces of l i f e and b e t t e r ad ap ted to th e environm ent.

There i s a n a tu ra l

s e le c tiv e p r in c ip le , analogous to th e human b re e d e r, which guar­ a n te e s th a t th e b e t t e r adapted anim als s h a ll su rv iv e and p e rp e t­ u a te t h e i r k in d , namely, th e s tru g g le f o r e x is te n c e .

I n th e

s tru g g le f o r ex lsten o e th o se su rv iv e whose v a r ia tio n s b e s t adapt them to e x is tin g circu m stan ces.

Thus th e re w i l l be "th e su rv iv a l

54

o f th e f i t " , to use S p en cer's phrase*

Those who a re f i t su rv iv e ,

grow to m a tu rity , and reproduce th em selv es.

The second genera­

tio n i n h e r i t s th e fa v o ra b le v a r ia tio n s which enabled t h e i r p ar­ e n ts to su rv iv e and develops a new range o f v a r ia tio n s among which th e more fav o rab le a re ag ain s e le c te d by th e same p ro c e s s .

The

e f f e c t i s cum ulative and e v e n tu a lly le a d s to th e form ation of o rg an ized s tr u c tu r e s t h a t a re p ro g re s s iv e ly q u a lif ie d to d e a l w ith th e circum stances o f l i f e . 1 I n h is Descent of Man (1871) Darwin a p p lie d h is th e o ry to man.

Man, as one s p e c ie s among o th e rs , a ls o had h is n a tu r a l

o r ig in and developed from some low er sim ian form .

While Darwin

proposed th e th eo ry of n a tu ra l s e le c tio n a s th e most Im portant f a c to r i n e v o lu tio n , he d id not claim th a t i t was a oomplete ex­ p la n a tio n . II.

Darwinism. While Darwin was ooncem ed alm ost e x c lu siv e ly w ith th e

b io lo g ic a l asp e c ts of th e problem , o th e r th in k e rs a p p lie d h is th eo ry to e th ic s , h is to r y , so cio lo g y and an th ro p o lo g y ,- th e sc ie n c e s d is t in c t iv e ly concerned w ith man.

Metz d e s c rib e s th e

im p lic a tio n s o f Darwinism f o r philosophy i n g e n e ra l. "As a philosophy i t made th e sub-human th e measure o r norm of th e human, re g a rd in g th e human no lo n g e r as having a s ig n ific a n c e o f i t s own b u t simply as b eing th e l a s t branch o f a g e n e a lo g ic a l tr e e reach in g back i n t o th e anim al and p la n t w orld. E xpressed more g e n e ra lly , i t in te r p r e te d ev e ry th in g n o t by th e h ig h e r b u t by th e low er forms o f na­ t u r e . I t was a n a tu ra lism in th a t i t made sub-human fa c ­ t o r s more emphatic th a n c u l tu r a l ones, a blologlsm in th a t i t co n stru ed p h ilo s o p h ic a l q u e stio n s th ro u g h b io lo g ic a l 1 . Of. R. B. P e rry , Philosophy o f th e Recent P a s t , p p . 2 2-7.

55

c a te g o rie s and th e o r ie s , an ev o lu tio n ism In th a t I t viewed a l l th in g s as p a r t of a p ro c e ss of upward developm ent, and a mechanism because I t ex p lain ed te le o lo g lc g l phenomena in term s o f m echanical causes and t h e i r la w s."^ That D arw in's work c re a te d an epoch b o th in sc ien c e and philosophy i s due to se v e ra l f a c t o r s .

F or one th in g i t v io la te d

th e p r e v a ilin g p r a c t is e among b io lo g is t* of c la s s if y in g th e forms of l i f e on th e assum ption th a t they had no h is to r y beyond t h e i r rep ro d u ctio n in su c cessiv e g e n e ra tio n s o f in d iv id u a ls .

The

Church a ls o opposed th e new th eo ry on th e ground th a t i t con­ f l i c t e d w ith th e orthodox i n te r p r e t a ti o n o f c re a tio n i n G enesis. The new view found s t i l l an o th e r source o f o p p o sitio n in th e te le o lo g lc a l d o c trin e s of th e g re a t p h ilo so p h e rs. “Both pagan and C h ris tia n philosophy had tau g h t t h a t n a tu re could not be ad eq u ately ex p lain ed w ithout r e s o r t to a p r in ­ c ip le v a rio u s ly known as 'p u rp o s e ', 'f i n a l c a u s e ', 'P ro v i­ d e n c e ', and 'd e s ig n 1. The m echanical th e o ry had made g re a t in ro a d s upon t h i s d o c trin e and th e liv i n g organism was looked upon as i t s l a s t stro n g h o ld . I f t h i s marvel o f n ic e a d ju s t­ ment and fu n c tio n a l u t i l i t y could be ex p lain e d by th e fo r­ tu ito u s o p e ra tio n of b lin d f o rc e s , th en n a tu re no lo n g e r , a ffo rd e d evidence of in te llig e n c e or of s p i r i t o r of God." The new school o f id e a lism which aro se in G reat B r i t a i n sim ultan eo u sly w ith Darwinism was p a r t i c u l a r l y opposed to th e e v o lu tio n a ry p o s itio n during th e f i r s t sta g e s of t h e i r develop­ ment. III.

H erbert Spencer. Whereas Darwin proposed a s c i e n t i f i c h y p o th esis which le n t

i t s e l f to p h ilo s o p h ic a l in te r p r e t a ti o n , H erb ert Spencer (18201903) was a p h ilo so p h e r w ith a p re p o sse ssio n f o r s c ie n c e .

"With

£• R udolf Metz, A Hundred Y ears o f B r iti s h P h ilo so p h y , p . 97. 3 . P e rry .o p . o ltT , p . 26.

56

Darwin ev o lu tio n was a b io lo g ic a l law; w ith Spencer I t was a cosmic g e n e r a liz a tio n ." ^

S p en ce r's philosophy brought t o a

focus th e p r e v a ilin g id e a s o f h lu day, p a r t i c u l a r l y th e l i n e s o f though t in v o lv ed In th e Darwinian th e o ry . h is te n volume System o f P h ilo so p h y .

H is c h ie f work I s

In i t he s e t f o r th an

eplstem ology whloh li m i t s knowledge to th e f i e l d of ex p erien ce and to th e co n ten t o f sc ie n c e , and then a p p lie d h is ev o lu tio n a ry p r in c ip le to th e f i e l d s of b io lo g y , psychology, sociology and e th ic s . A.

Spencer1s D e fin itio n o f E v o lu tio n .

Spencer fo rm u lated a law of e v o lu tio n . "Having seen t h a t m a tte r i s I n d e s tr u c tib le , motion c o n tin ­ uous, and fo rc e p e r s i s t e n t - having seen th a t fo rc e s a re everywhere undergoing tra n sfo rm a tio n , and th a t m otion, always fo llo w in g th e l i n e o f l e a s t r e s is ta n c e , i s in v a r i ­ ab ly rhythm ic, i t rem ains to d isc o v er th e s im ila rly in ­ v a r ia b le form ula ex p ressin g th e comblned-consequences o f th e a c tio n s th u s s e p a ra te ly fo rm u la te d ." He a r r iv e s a t t h i s law in d u c tiv e ly , from a study o f th e phenomena, and d e d u c tiv e ly , as an Im p lic a tio n o f th e p e r s is te n c e o f fo rc e . He f in d s th re e c h a r a c te r i s tic f e a tu re s in every evolving phenom­ ena - I n te g r a tio n , d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , and d e te rm in a tio n .

There i s

an I n te g r a tio n o f m a tte r and accompanying d is s ip a tio n o f m otion. There i s a growing d if f e r e n t i a t i o n of s tr u c tu r e - a change from homogeneity to h e te ro g e n e ity .

And th e re i s a change from confu­

sio n to o rd e r, o r from th e in d e f in i te to th e d e f i n i t e .

A p a ra lle l

tra n sfo rm a tio n o f th e r e ta in e d motion accompanies th e s e changes. The com plete d e f in itio n i s : "E volution i s an I n te g r a tio n of mat­ 4 . IM d < , p . 29. 5 . Quoted by James S eth, E n g lish P h ilo so p h e rs and Schools o f P h ilo so p h y , p . 289.

i

57

t e r and concom itant d is s ip a tio n o f m otion; d u rin g which th e mat­ t e r p a s se s from an I n d e f in ite , in c o h e re n t homogeneity t o a de­ f i n i t e , coherent h e te ro g e n e ity ; and d uring which th e r e ta in e d motion undergoes a p a r a l l e l tra n s f o r m a tio n .1,0 B.

S p e n c e r's Theory o f Knowledge.

Spencer su b sc rib ed to th e d o c trin e of th e r e l a t i v i t y of knowledge.

We can know only th e r e l a t i v e , th e c o n d itio n e d , th e

phenomenal.

We can only know a th in g by r e l a t i n g i t to o th e r

th in g s o r to o u rs e lv e s , or by in tro d u c in g q u a lify in g c o n d itio n s; what th e th in g i s u n c o n d itio n a lly escapes u s .

Because t h i s i s

so reaso n o b lig e s us to p o s it an A bsolute or U nconditioned. T his Unknowable i s th e fo rc e which th r u s ts phenomena upon u s . The w orld a c c e s s ib le to our ex p erien ce and a l l i t s changes, are th e r e v e la tio n of a Power which i s i n f i n i t e i n space and tim e and rem ains c o n s ta n t amid a l l th e changes. In S p en cer's opin io n h is d o c trin e of th e unknowableness of th e A bsolute fu rn is h e d th e bond of r e c o n c ilit a tl o n between r e lig i o n and s c ie n c e .

The Unknowable i s acknowledged and r e s ­

p ec ted in scien ce and philosophy as a f i r s t cause, or a f i n a l g o al, o r a supreme g e n e r a liz a tio n .

Prom th e p o in t of view of

r e lig io n i t i s th e o b je c t tow ard which th e r e lig io u s co n scio u s­ ness i s d ir e c te d .

The sphere o f scien ce and philosophy i s th e

knowable; th e sphere o f r e lig io n i s th e unknowable.

Since th e

Unknowable cannot be known, sc ien c e r e f e r s i t to r e lig io n ; sin ce scien ce a ffirm s th e Unknowable, r e lig i o n enjoys s c i e n t i f i c sup6 . Quoted by James S eth , i b i d . , p p . 289-80.

58

p o r t . 7 »8 C.

Spencer* a S ociology*

S pencer’s aim was to show th a t s o c ia l development I s a phase of th e u n iv e rs a l ev o lu tio n a ry p ro c e s s .

S o c ia l l i f e de­

pends f o r i t s advancement on i t s c a p a c ity f o r adjustm ent to n a tu ra l c o n d itio n s and to th e s o c ia l environm ent. and h e r e d ity e f f e c t th e adjustm ent p o s itiv e ly .

T ra d itio n

The e lim in a tio n

o f im p e rfe c tly adapted s o c ie tie s e f f e c t i t n e g a tiv e ly .

Spencer

emphasized th e Darwinian p r in c ip le of s e le c tio n and matched the slogan "the s tru g g le f o r e x is te n c e ” w ith h is eq u ally famous "the s u rv iv a l o f th e f i t t e s t " .

Spencer used th e f a c to r o f d i f f e r ­

e n tia tio n as the c r i t e r i o n f o r m easuring th e degree o f develop­ ment o r c u ltu re a tta in e d by th e v ario u s s o c ia l organism s.

The

g r e a te r th e d if f e r e n t i a t i o n w ith in a s o c ie ty , th e g r e a te r i t s advance in th e ev o lu tio n a ry s c a le , and hence, th e g r e a te r i t s advantage over r i v a l s o c ie tie s i n th e s tru g g le f o r e x is te n c e .9 " I t was th u s th a t f o r Spencer h is own age - th e age o f lib e r a lis m , in d u s try , technology, sc ien c e, w o rld -tra d e , and p e a c e fu l competi­ tio n among th e n a tio n s - was th e clim ax o f man’s advance."10 Metz f u r th e r r e l a t e s Spencer to h is tim es by say in g , ' "In every realm he stood f o r th e f re e p la y o f f o rc e s , f o r l a i s s e z - f a i r e in p o l i t i c s , in tr a d e , and i n e d u c atio n , ab­ h o rrin g a l l use of fo rc e by th e S ta te , a l l despotism and m ilita ris m , a l l c o n tro l o f co n scien ce, re p re s s io n o f f re e o p in io n , e c c l e s i a s t i c a l orthodoxy, and such l i k e . I n a l l which he f a i t h f u l l y r e f le c te d th e id e a ls o f th e e x p irin g 7. 8. 9. 10.

C f. Metz, op. c i t . , pp. 105—6. C f. P e rry , 0£ . c i t . , pp . 3 1-2. Cf. Metz, o£. c i t . , p . 108. Loo. c i t .

59

c e n tu ry , i t s lib e r a lis m and in d iv id u a lism , i t s d izzy p ro ­ g r e s s , i t s i l l u s i o n of freedom, i t s boun d less f a i t h in knowledge, and i t s r e lig io u s in d if f e r e n c e - f e a tu r e s h ea r­ in g p la in ly th e stamp of th e E nlightenm ent i n which th ey had t h e i r o r ig in ." D.

S p en ce r's E th ic s .

Spenoer, i n h is e th ic s , co n tin u ed th e t r a d i t i o n of th e e a r l i e r B r iti s h e m p iric a l system s.

A ccepting th e b a s ic p o s itio n s

of u t i l i t a r i a n hedonism, he wove h is own e v o lu tio n is t th e o ry w ith in th a t framework. ab le a c t i v i t y .

Good c o n s is ts fundam entally in p le a s u r­

The w e ll-a d ap te d l i f e and h ap p in ess go hand in

hand a s ex p ressio n s o f th e good. u n le ss i t i s p le a s a n t.

L ife i s n o t co n sid ered good

P le a s u re , i n tu rn , i s th e mark o f a suc­

c e s s f u l, w e ll-a d ap te d l i f e . "The course o f e v o lu tio n i s a change f o r th e b e t t e r ; th e evolved s o c ie ty and th e good l i f e a re one and th e same th in g . For as l i f e evolves i t i s b o th d if f e r e n t i a t e d and in te g r a te d - b o th in c re a se d in amount and harm oniously ad­ j u s t e d , w ith in and w ith o u t. The evolved so c ie ty re p re s e n ts b o th th e maximum amottnt of l i f e and i t s maximum smoothness and f a c i l i t y , th u s doubly im plying a maximum of h a p p i n e s s " . 1 2 Spencer d is tin g u is h e d between a b so lu te e th ic s and r e l a t i v e e th ic s .

The form er d e fin e s th e conduct p ro p e r to a p e r f e c tly

evolved s o c ie ty ; th e l a t t e r d e fin e s th e conduct p ro p er to th e Im p erfect sta g es th ro u g h which s o c ie ty approaches th a t U topian g o a l. IV .

Thomas Henry Huxley. The course which ev o lu tio n ism took a f t e r Darwin and Spencer

w ill not be tra c e d i n a l l i t s phases and v a r i e t i e s .

I t s power

11. I b i d . , pp. "108-9• 12. P e rry , oj>. c i t . , p . 36.

J

60

and scope w i n m erely be in d ic a te d by r e f e r r in g to a few of i t s most prom inent r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s .

Most o f th o se who e la b o ra te d

th e new id e a were s c i e n t i s t s , r a th e r than p h ilo s o p h e rs . Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-95) was one o f th e most im p o rtan t advocates o f th e new view o f th e u n iv e rs e .

Huxley took over

D arw in's conception of th e s tru g g le f o r e x is te n c e , b u t was scep­ t i c a l b o th of th e law of a d a p ta tio n and th e d o c trin e of n a tu ra l s e le c tio n *

He brought about a c lo se connection between evolu­

tio n ism and em piricism by a c c e p tin g Hume's p o s itio n t h a t a l l r e a l knowledge i s co n fin ed to th e world of e x p e rien ce . A.

Huxley' s A gnosticism .

Although H u x ley 's p o s itio n s were sometimes d escrib ed as m a t e r i a l i s t i c , he h im se lf i n s i s t e d th a t he sto o d on a p la tfo rm fundam entally d if f e r e n t from th a t o f th e o rd in ary s c i e n t i f i c m a te ria lis t.

Whereas m a terialism a s s e r ts th a t m a tte rs and fo rc e

a re th e only u ltim a te r e a l i t i e s , Huxley s a id , " . • . . i t seems to me p r e t t y p la in th a t th e re i s a t h i r d th in g in th e unlver-® , to w it, co n scio u sn ess, which i n th e hard n ess of my h e a r t o r head I cannot see to be m a tte r o r fo rc e o r any co n ceiv ab le m odifica­ tio n o f e i t h e r . " 1’5 Tending from t h i s p o in t of view tow ard B e rk e le la n id e alism he co n sid ers th e p h y s ic a l p r o p e r tie s as r e ­ d u c ib le to t h i s t h i r d f a c t - conscious s e n s a tio n . For Huxley th e re i s a ls o a d if f e r e n t way o f lo o k in g a t th e m a tte r, one th a t i s eq u ally p la u s ib le , and one which th e sc ie n ­ t i s t cannot ig n o re .

"From th e sta n d p o in t of scien ce th e human

13. Quoted by A. K. Rogers, E n g lish and American Philosophy sin ce 1800. pp . 176-7.

61

tody i s a mechanism f u l l y accounted f o r in term s o f p h y s ic a l law, and consciousness i s only a c o l l a t e r a l p ro d u ct o f th e a c tio n o f th e b r a in , as com pletely w ith o u t in flu e n c e i n m odifying i t s laws as th e n o ise of th e w h is tle t h a t accompanies th e work of th e locom otive i s w ithout in flu e n c e on i t s m achinery. "-1-4 Here we have two d if f e r e n t s t a r t i n g p o in ts b oth of which a re p la u s ib le , y e t th ey le a d to o p p o site c o n c lu sio n s.

T his le ad s

Huxley to h is a g n o s tic p o s itio n and to th e co n clu sio n th a t we know n o th in g about how th e m a tte r u ltim a te ly sta n d s.

He w rite s ,

"You see, I am q u ite as ready to admit your d o c trin e th a t so u ls s e c re te b o d ies as I am th e o p p o site one th a t bodies s e c r e te so u ls , - simply because I deny th e p o s s i b i l i t y of o b ta in in g any evidence as to th e tr u t h o r falseh o o d o f e i t h e r h y p o th e sis. My fundam ental axiom of sp e c u la tio n philosophy i s t h a t m a te ria lism and s p ir itu a lis m a re o p p o site p o le s o f th e same a b s u rd ity - th e a b s u rd ity o f im agining t h a t we know an y th in g about e i th e r s p i r i t o r m a tte r ." 15 Of th e two a l te r n a ti v e s th e p h y s ic a l h y p o th esis i s th e more v a l­ u able f o r p r a c t ic a l p ru p o ses. Huxley in v en ted th e term "agnosticism " to d e s c rib e h is p h i­ lo s o p h ic a l system .

" I t s maxims a r e , p o s itiv e ly , i n m a tte rs of

th e i n t e l l e c t follow your own reaso n as f a r a s i t w ill ta k e you, w ithout reg ard to any o th e r c o n s id e ra tio n ; n e g a tiv e ly , i n m atters o f th e i n t e l l e c t do n o t p re te n d th a t co n clu sio n s a re c e r ta in which a re not dem onstrated o r dem onstrable." B.

TR

Huxley1s E th ic s .

Huxley made a c o n trib u tio n to th e ev o lu tio n a ry th e o ry of m orals i n h is E v o lu tio n and E th ic s (1893).

He m ain tain ed th a t

14. I b i d . . p . 177. 15. Quoted by R ogers, op. c i t . . pp. 177-8. 16. I b i d . , p . 179.

!

62

the law of evolution holds good In the moral sphere. life Is the exaot anthlthesls of the moral life.

The natural

In the natural

life the Individual exploits his superiority In the pitiless competition of the struggle for existence, while the weak are allowed to suffer the fatal consequences of their weakness.

In

the moral life the pitiless competitive struggle is repudiated and the weak are protected by the self-saorifioe and assistance of others.

V.

George Henry Lewes. George Henry Lewes (1817-78) insisted that philosophy should

be scientific.

By this he meant that It should follow the methods

of the natural sciences and limit itself to the empirical as that which alone Is knowable.

He coined the phrase "metempirical"

to denote that which lies beyond experience. "Thus the notion of a soul behind mental phenomena, of a substratum in which qualities inhere, of power as an effec­ tive agent, of law as that which is supposed to govern changes Instead of undertaking simply to describe them these are all metempirical, mere hypostasized verbal abstrac­ tions, and should be rigorously exoluded from a scientific philosophy. Philosophy accordingly becomes a logic of the highest concepts or generalizations of science."17 Another conception which Lewes contributed to philosophy is that of emergence.

He distinguished between the type of phenomena

that manifests itself as a sheer novelty in relation to its ante­ cedents which he called the emergent, from the type that can be entirely understood through the properties of its constituent factors, which he called the resultant.

In this respect he anti­

cipated the emergent philosophy of C. L. Morgan and 8. Alexander. 17. Xb}^., p . 168.

I

63

VI.

The Views of Evolutlonary-Naturallsts on Ethlos* The ethical views of Spenoer and Huxley have already been

referred to#

Now the views of Clifford and Stephen will be add­

ed as being of significance in the development in"evolutionist ethics. A*

William Klngdon Clifford*

William Kingdon Clifford (1845-79) introduced the idea of the "tribal self.

In his eplstemology Clifford held that the

belief in the external world rests upon a sort of social in­ stinct.

But if society furnishes us with our belief in the ex­

ternal world, so too, in ethics, it is the creator of the moral sense.

By the term "tribal self we are to understand ". . . .

the sense, partly inherited and partly acquired, of what conduces to the interests of the tribe or social group to which the indi18 vidual belongs." "Conscience is the Judgment of the 'tribal sfclf on the individual self, the voice of Man within us command19 ing us to work for Man." It is the outgrowth of social experi­ ence and has to do with the survival of the tribe as a tribe in the struggle for existence.

The moral end is neither my own

greatest happiness, nor altruism, but increased efficiency as a citizen.

The most perfect member of society is one who suppresses

his own interests and recognizes only those of the tribe.

A thing

is morally good or evil according to whether it is useful or harm­ ful to the tribe - whether it promotes or impedes its efficiency 20 or capacity for survival. 18. Rudolf Metz, A Hundred Years of British Philosophy, p. 125. 19. Rogers, o£. cit., p. 188. 20. Cf. Rogers, loo, cit. and Metz, loo, cit.

64

B.

Leslie Stephen.

Metz is of the opinion that ". • . . Sir Leslie Stephen (1832-1904) . . . .

in his chief systematic work The Science of

Ethics (1882) made what is perhaps the maturest. and best thoughtout contribution to establishing morals upon the foundation of 21 evolutionist philosophy." Stephen had assimilated the entire thought of the British tradition, including the classical Bri­ tish empiricism, the utilitarianism of Bentham and the Mills, as well as the evolutionism of Darwin and Spencer.

In his work he

exhibits certain features common to this tradition such as, hosti­ lity to metaphysics, indifference to religion, the appeal to ex­ perience as the sole source of our knowledge, and the emphasis on exact science, which he considered to be the only valid model for philosophy. Stephens looks for an objective standard for the science of ethics in the application of biology to the conception of the social organism.

He put forth the conception of "social health",

the conditions of which are to be discovered in the "social tis­ sue".

The individual is not a mere self-subsistent unit of

society, neither is society a mere aggregate of individuals. Society is a social organism and the individual la a part of that body.

The individual is "social tissue". The moral criterion is the health and efficiency of the

social organism.

Those things are good in an individual which

make him vigorous social tissue, which fit him ". . . . t o play his part in a society capable of surviving in the struggle for 21. Metz,

0 £.

cit., p. 135.

65

existence."22 community.

An act is good if it promotes the welfare of the

A community is most likely to survive in the struggle

for existence when its individual members are governed by moral norms which presuppose the social health of the whole.

*The

final goal of all morality is the health, power, efficiency, and vitality of the social tissue, and conduct only fulfills the moral law in so far as it is directed to this end."

O'*

Although Stephen rejects pleasure and "the greatest happi­ ness of the greatest number" as adequate criteria for ethics, he does have a place for the principle of utility in his ethics. He conceives of utility not in the sense of producing pleasure and happiness, but rather in the sense of promoting health and maintaining life, and the latter is far more fundamental.

Evolu­

tion guarantees an approximation of the two, for, while pleasure and health are not coincident, they do result from approximately the same acts. A further consequence of evolution is that through natural selection certain ways of acting acquire a stronger moral weight than others.

What the human community approves is not the single

Isolated act but the character from which it springs.

Hence,

evolution fosters not only certain ways of acting but also speci­ fic types of character.

This represents an advance, for the

morality of inward habit is Jiigher than the morality of outward practise.

Accordingly the highest ethical law is not "Do this",

but "Be this". 22. Rogers, op. cit., p. 195. 23. Metz, 0 £. cit., p. 138.

j

66

VII.

The Views of Evolutlonary-Naturallsts on Religion. The question as to whether there could "be a union "between

Darwinism and religion was answered both In the negative and In the affirmative•by various representatives of this school. A.

William Kingdon Clifford.

Foremost among those who answered this question negatively was Clifford, whose views of ethics we have already referred to. "He rose to a real fanaticism of unbelief, and in his denial of God had no scruple in handling the positive religions with extreme harshness, raging against Church, creed and priesthood with the suppressed hatred of a prophet of En­ lightenment. Christianity he called 'a terrible^plague which has destroyed two civilizations' . . . Clifford found a substitute for religious faith in the wor­ ship of the universe, and in his religion of humanity put man in the place of God.

He wrote, "From the dim dawn of History and

from the inmost depth of every soul, the face of our Father Man looks out upon us with the fire of eternal youth in his eyes, and says, Before Jehovah was, I am."^5

The feeling of reverent awe

which animated him as he stood in the presence of the marvelous order and regularity of the universe he called "cosmic emotion". The temple in which he worshipped was the edifice of science.

He

expected all further human progress to come through the avenues of science. B.

Charles Grant Allen.

Charles Grant Allen (1848-99) set aside religion entirely. He declared he had never felt awe and reverence in contemplating 24. Ibid., p. 126. 25. Quoted by Rogers, on. cit., pp. 188-9.

67

the world of nature.

"No emancipated man", he writes, "feels

the need of aught to replace superstition", that Is, religion.

26

Whereas agnosticism might say concerning the significance of the religious experience, "I do not know", Allen's attitude was, "There is nothing to be known."

The end of man is to be happy

in a naturalistic sense. C.

William Wlnwood Reade.

William Winwood Reade's (1838-75) The Martyrdom of Man (1872) was a striking literary success.

In it he rejected all transcen­

dent values and all religious faith.

For them he substituted

faith in the omnipotence of science.

With the weapons of science

disease will be exterminated and the forces of nature mastered. Man will then be perfect.

What Reade calls Man, is not the in­

dividual man, but Humanity as a whole.

". . . . when we survey

mankind as One, we find it becoming more and more noble, more and more divine, slowly ripening toward Perfection." D.

P7

George John Romanes.

The question of a possible union between Darwinism and re­ ligion was not always answered with an uncompromising "No".

The

problem troubled George John Romanes (1848-94) throughout his life.

He vacillated between a theistic and an atheistic view of

the world until his last work Thoughts on Religion (1896), pub­ lished after his death, revealed that he was reconciled with re­ ligious belief.

Romanes brought his scientific convictions into

harmonious adjustment with a personal theism in the sense of 26. Quoted by Rogers, ibid., p. 185. 27. Quoted by Rogers, ibid., p. 189.

68

Christianity.

The theistio outlook on the world as well as Dar­

winism and the doctrine of evolution retained their full validity. E.

James Allanson Plcton.

Another thinker of a more religious frame of mind was James Allanson Picton (1832-1910) who occupied himself with extablishing a religion upon an evolutionary foundation.

He took his

metaphysics from Spencer's First Principles and, by Identifying the unknowable with the divine, turned Spencer's system in the direction of religious philosophy.

Plcton, in maintaining the

self-organization and self-sufficiency of the universe, rejected God as the Creator.

Nevertheless he attempted to demonstrate

that his "Christian Pantheism" was identical with the essential core of the historic religions. F.

James Croll.

James Croll (1821-90), a Scottish geologist, adopted the most important elements of the theory of evolution.

According

to the law of evolution, matter, force and movement are the factors which determine and explain the entire cosmic process. To Croll the fundamental problem of philosophy is how these factors themselves are to be explained.

Croll examines the

alternatives and his solution is ". . . . the assumption of an eternal and Infinite God, as the first Determiner of the cosmic series, or as the Creator Spirit who is the ultimate cause of all being, and so, too, the Sustainer of the entire evolutionary process.

Evolutionism thus, while retaining its full validity,

is not a self-contained and self-subsistent theory, but in the

69

end passes over into Theism: . . . ." G.

28

Henry Drummond.

Henry Drummond (1851-97), evangelist, theologian, and scien­ tific investigator attempted to include religion within the system of naturalistic science.

The "basic thought of his Natural Law in

the Spiritual World (1883) is that the laws which are valid for the natural world are likewise valid in the spiritual world.

"It

is the task of science to establish the naturalness of the super­ natural; of religion, to demonstrate the supernaturalness of the natural."^0

This "book was a means of reconciling to the new doc­

trine of evolution that part of the public which had previously objected to it on religious grounds. In a later volume, The Ascent of Man (1894), Drummond tried to modify the prevailing concept of the struggle for existence and gave it a more altruistic form - the struggle for another's existence. VIII.

The Views of Evolutlonary-Naturallsts on Sociology. Spencer's application of the evolutionary hypothesis to

social development has already been noted.30

The only other re­

presentative whose application of Darwinism to sociology will be noted here is Benjamin Kidd. A.

Benjamin Kidd.

Social Evolution (1894) by Benjamin Kidd (1858-1916) was as 28. Metz, op. cit.. p. 132. 29. Ibid., pp. 132-3. 30. Cf. pp. 53,59.

70

much of a success as Drummond's Nat viral Law in the Spiritual World judging by its enthusiastic reception by the general public. In it Kidd took over the basic contentions of the evolutionary theory and applied them to sociology. The law of Individual and social human existence, like that for the animal world, is unceasing struggle and strife.

The in­

terests of individuals, social organisms and entire societies are in conflict. Society in all its forms arose from this struggle for existence through natural processes of selective breeding and is still subject to its laws. At this point Kidd diverges from the Darwinian principle to give his sociology an essentially emotional basis.

He emphasizes

the affective faotors in man at the expense of the rational and Intellectual.

He holds that natural selection fosters the emo­

tional qualities rather than the intellectual, and also ascribes to them a greater social efficacy.

Whereas evolutionism had

previously exalted knowledge and science as the supreme factors in social evolution, Kidd made all human betterment, individual and social, primarily dependent on feeling. Kidd took a further step in identifying the world of feeling with the domain of religion. phenomena.

Religion is an eminently social

Ultimately it is the real principle of selection in

the struggle for existence.

Religion is the greatest force in

promoting social progress.

In the struggle for existence, re­

ligious peoples will overcome irreligious peoples and show them­ selves the fitter to survive.

The importance of religion is due

largely to the fact that it cultivates altruism and encourages

71

unselfish surrender to the best interests of the community. "The highest form of social structure is that which is based upon the highest measure of religious faith and moral will and the highest form of religious faith is Christianity, in which Kidd sees the very backbone of the entire culture of the West, the central pillar of the whole edifice."®'*' IX.

The Relation of James Orr to the Evolut1onary-Naturallst

School. Orr has stated his views of evolution in The Christian View of God and the World (1893), God1s Image in Man (1905), Sin as a Problem To-day (1910) and The Faith of a Modern Christian (1910). The specific problem which he set for himself was to reconcile the theory of evolution with a theistio view of the world. A. Orr1s View of the Facts of Evolution. Orr distinguishes between the fact and the method of evolu* tion and frequently expresses the opinion that although the fact of evolution has been established, its method is still a matter 32 of debate. His general position is: "On every side we hear the admission made that while the fact of evolution, or doctrine of descent, stands secure, the laws which Darwin invoked to explain it - especially natural selection - are inadequate for that purpose, and that the real factors in evolution are yet to seek, and must, to a larger extent than Darwin, even in his latest stage, acknowledged, be sought within the organism".'5’5 B.

Orr1s View of the Method of Evolution.

The statement Just quoted also serves to express Orr’s 31. Metz. op. cit., p. 144. 32. Cf. James Orr, The Christian View of God and the World, pp. 119, 476, and Sin as a Problem To-day, pp. 133, 154. 33. James Orr, God1s Image in Man. pp. 97-8.

72

view of the method of evolution.

He is especially critical of

Darwin's position, "but by taking various factors from different scientists he constructs his own view of the method of evolution, one which harmonizes with the theistic view of the world.

His

views on this question follow. 1.

Orr's Criticisms of Darwin's View. Orr does not deny the existence of the laws on which Darwin

relies, but questions whether they are sufficient to explain the evolutionary process.

He states the inadequacies of the Darwinian

principles in the following manner. 1. "There is admittedly variation in organisms, but varia­ tion, . . . . is neither indefinite nor unlimited, and in the state of nature there is a strong tendency to reversion to type........ Variations, besides, are not always slight and gradual* They may be, and sometimes are, of a pronounced character, and involve correlated changes in the organism as a whole. 2. There is a struggle for existence, but where the struggle is severe it does not . . . . aid, but hinders, evolution. 3. There is natural selection, but it is increasingly recog­ nized that natural selection creates nothing.......... Given the fitter specimen (or organ), natural selection comes into play to preserve it, but it has no power of itself to produce the fitter specimen. 4. On various grounds the power attributed to natural selec­ tion of infallibly picking out infinitesimal favourable varia­ tions, and preserving them for many (perhaps millions of) generations till new favourable variations are added, is widely recognized to be untenable. 5. The acknowledged sterility of hybrids is a serious block in the way of the theory. This difficulty weighed strongly with Professor Huxley, and kept him from ever giving his unqualified assent to the theory of natural selection. 6. Apart from the general impossibility of explaining the marvelous adaptations of organic beings by the action of un­ intelligent causes, there is the fact, as Darwin was led

73

ultimately to acknowledge, that there.are numerous organic structures which neither did originate, nor could have origi­ nated, from natural selection........ 7. The geological record, while lending general support to the theory of descent, is in manifold conflict with the special Darwinian form of the theory." 2.

Orr’s Revised Conception of Evolution. Rather than reject the evolutionary theory, Orr prefers to

revise the conception of evolution and find some other rationale of it than that offered by the theory of natural selection, at the same time allowing to the factor of natural selection what­ ever subordinate place may rightly belong to it. a.

The Inner Power of Development of Organisms.

Orr finds the basis for this revised conception ready-made in the tendency of certain evolutionists such as Owen, Mivart, Asa Gray, G. H. Lewes, Dana and J. J. Murphy, to seek the cause of evolution within, rather than without the organism.

Orr falls

in line with this tendency ". . . . t o transfer the secret of evolution more and more to causes within the organism, and to re­ gard the external causes as subsidiary - stimulative, discrimina­ tive, eliminative - not primary or originative."35

Whereas the

Darwinian theory puts the emphasis on natural selection and denies that the process is teleological, Orr insists that the evolutionary process is teleological - the result of a directive intelligence. "If the fortuity of Darwinism is rejected, there is but one alternative conception, whatever the precise phrase used to express it (self-adaptation, orthogenesis, or the like) 34. Orr, ibid., pp. 100-5. 35. Orr, Sin as a Problem To-day, p. 153.

74

that the changes through which new organs are developed, and new types formed, have their origin from within, and are di­ rected by the forces that produce them to an end. The pro­ cess, Indeed, is not fatalistic. 0n< one side is the stimulus or environment; on the other, response to that stimulus, and adaptation to the peculiar need - with whatever assistance natural selection, use or disuse, or other so-called 'Lamarokian1 factors can yield. But in and through all purposeful forces are at w o r k . "3° Thus organisms possess not only an inner power of development but also a power of adjustment adapting them to environment.* b.

The Rate of Production of New

Species.

Along with the tendency to transfer the primary

causes of

evolution from without to within the organism 11. . . . goes, naturally, a larger recognition of definiteness, direction, and correlation in variation, and surrender of the idea that evolu­ tion must necessarily proceed to extremely slow and insensible d e g r e e s . A c c o r d i n g l y Orr subscribes to the view that varia­ tions are not always exceedingly minute and rare but are some­ times sudden and of considerable magnitude and that evolution proceeds by "leaps'1 as well as by slow processes.®® "A vast amount of evidence has been collected,. . . . show­ ing that very remarkable variations do appear, new forms, new structures, quite suddenly, in both animals and plants. There has been, accordingly, an increasing disposition to admit, as best in harmony with the facts, that the changes giving rise to new varieties and species may not always have been, as the Darwinian theory postulates, slow and insen­ sible, but have been at times marked and sudden. 36. Orr, God's Image in Man. pp. 110-1. * Orr's view of the method of evolution as expressed here and in The Christian View of God and the World, p. 121, Is essentially the same as that expressed by Julian S. Huxley, Evolution, Encyclopaedia Brltannlca, 14th Ed., Vol. 8, p. 916. 37. Orr, Sin as a Problem To-day, p. 153. 38. Cf. Ibid., Chapters V and VI. 39. Orr, God's Image in Man, pp. 113-4.

75

c.

The Existence of Kingdoms in Nature.

A third respect in which the "newer evolutionism" differs from the old is that whereas Darwinism asserts that organic ad­ vance has been continuous from the lowest form to the highest, Orr follows those who conceive of nature as an ascending series of 'kingdoms' - the higher in each case involving new factors, and requiring a specific cause to account for it.

How is the

gulf between the inorganic and the organic, between the insen­ tient and the conscious, between the animal consciousness and the moral and spiritual personality of man to be bridged?

Each

of these distinct stages or kingdoms in nature needs a creative act of God for its introduction. "Finally, it is the view of man distinguished evolutionists that the course of evolution Itself compels us to recognize the existence of breaks in the chain of development, where, as they think, some new and creative cause must have come into operation. I may instance Mr. Wallace, a thorough­ going evolutionist, who recognizes three such 'stages in the development of the organic world, when some new cause or power must necessarily have come into action', via. (a) at the introduction of life, (b) at the introduction of sensation or consciousness, (c) at the introduction of man. With the view I hold of development as a process, determined from within, I do not feel the same need for emphasising these 'breaks'. We have indeed at the points named, the appearance of something entirely new, but so have we, in a lesser degree, with every advance or improve­ ment in the organism, e.g. with the first rudiment of an eye, or new organ of any kind. The action of the creative cause is spread along the whole line of advance, revealing Itself In higher and higher potencies as the development proceeds. It only breaks out more manifestly at the points named, where it founds a new order or kingdom or existence."-0 Orr summarizes the differences between his views and the Darwinian theory as follows. 40 • Orr. The Christian View of God and the World, p. 151.

NEW YORK U NIVERSITY SCH O O L OF EDUCATION • LIBRARY o

I ; 76

"The newer evolution differs from the old. . . . . in laying stress in the explanation of the organic advance mainly on causes internal to the organism, and in recognizing that these operate, not blindly, but in definite and purposeful directions. This change in the point of view from outer to inner, from causes working fortuitously, to a principle of inner teleology, has Immediate effects on the rest of the theory. It is no longer necessary, e.g., that variations should be regarded as slight, or progress as slow; that specific forms should be thought of as produced only by gradual and imperceptible modifications; that the ascent of life should be viewed as something absolutely continuous. These consequences all depend on the fundamental assumption that the effective agency in evolution is the fortuitous action of natural selection. When that is parted with, they lose their logical basis and justification. The causes of variation and progressive development being now placed chiefly within, there is no longer any reason why very con­ siderable variations, or even new types, should not appear suddenly, struck out by the Creative Power in the plastic organism. And this is the yiew which, I shall try to show, scientific facts support."41 d.

Evolution Involves a Beginning in Time.

Using arguments similar to those of his fellow-countryman James Croll, Orr concludes that the universe had a beginning in time. "Science compels us to go back to a beginning in time. No doctrine comes more powerfully to our support than the doc­ trine of evolution, which some suppose to be a denial of creation. If the universe were a stable system - i.e., if it were not in a condition of constant development and change - it might with some plausibility be argued that it had ex­ isted from eternity. But our knowledge of the past history of the world shows us that this is not its character; that on the contrary it Is progressive and developing. Now it lies in the very thought of a developing universe that, as we trace it back through narrower and narrower circles of development, we come at last to a beginning, - to some point from which the evolution started. The alternative to this is an eternal succession of cycles of existence, a theory which has often recurred, but which brings us back to the Impossi­ ble conception of a chain without a first link, of a series every term of which depends on a preceding, while yet the whole series depends on nothing. Science can give no proof 41. Orr, Sod1s Image in Man. pp. 108-9.

77

of an eternal succession, "but so far as It has any voice on the subject points in an opposite direction by showing that when the universe has parted with its energy, as it is in a constant0process of doing, it has no means of restoring it again." e.

Evolution and Theism not Necessarily Antagonistic. Orr expresses the opinion that no religious Interest is

imperilled by a theory of evolution which is viewed simply as a method of creation; and that, when evolution is restricted with­ in the limits which the best-established results of science im­ pose upon it, the apparent antagonism between evolution and theism disappears. "That species should have arisen by a method of derivation from some primeval germ (or germs) rather than by unrelated creations, is not only not inconceivable, but may even com­ mend Itself as a higher and more worthy conception of the divine working than the older hypothesis. Assume God - as many devout evolutionists do - to be immanent in the evo­ lutionary process, and His Intelligence and purpose to be expressed in it; then evolution, so far from conflicting with theism, may become a new and heightened form of the thelstic argument. The real impelling force of evolution is now from within; it is not blind but purposeful; forces are inherent in organisms which, not fortuitously but with design, work out the variety and gradations in nature we observe. Evolution is but the other side of a previous involution and only establishes a higher teleology."®

42. Orr, The Christian View of G-od and the World, pp. 150-1. 43. Orr, G o d ^ Image in Man. pp. 95-6.

CHAPTER VI THE NEO-IDEALIST SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY The in f lu x o f German p h ilo s o p h ic a l id e a lis m in to B r i t i s h thought i n th e l a t t e r h a l f o f th e n in e te e n th oen tu ry i s known as th e n e o - id e a lis t movement.

The movement owed i t s im pulse to Kant

and H egel, probably more to Hegel th an to K ant, though b o th th e se g r e a t German i d e a l i s t s e x e rc ise d a profound in flu e n c e on B r i t i s h p h ilo so p h y . V arious f a c to r s h elp ed to p re p a re th e way f o r an i d e a l i s t i c view o f th e w orld.

The m ental atm osphere was p rep ared f o r th e re ­

c e p tio n o f id e a lism by th e l i t e r a r y work o f men l i k e C o lerid g e and C a rly le .

A few i s o l a t e d p h ilo so p h e rs l i k e G ro te, F e r r l e r and U aurloe

h e ra ld e d th e i d e a l i s t i c d o c trin e b e fo re th e movement p ro p e r began. A nother f a c t o r which h elp ed to o r ig in a te th e new movement was th e c u l tiv a tio n o f th e c l a s s i c a l s tu d ie s in th e u n i v e r s i t i e s , e s p e c ia lly a t Oxford, where, u n d er th e le a d e rs h ip o f Jo wet t , th e p h ilo so p h io al in flu e n c e s coming from Germany were u n ite d w ith th e p h ilo so p h y o f c l a s s i c a l a n t iq u ity .

Added to th e s e was th e d e s ir e , prom pted by

r e lig i o u s i n t e r e s t s , to confirm th eo lo g y by means o f p h ilo so p h y and r e v iv if y th e Im p e rille d f a i t h a g a in s t ag n o tlclsm , n a tu ra lis m , r e ­ lig io u s in d if f e r e n c e and open u n b e lie f .

• The movement has a ls o been o a lle d N eo-H egelian, A nglo-H egellan o r N eo-K antlan.

79

The movement p a sse d through v a rio u s s ta g e s .1

The work o f

P e r r ie r and Jo w ett was c h ie f ly o f an e x p lo ra to ry n a tu re .

Follow­

in g th e e x p lo re rs came th e p io n e e rs - S t i r l i n g , Green, th e C aird s, W allace and o th e r s .

T h e ir work was la r g e ly e x e g e tic a l.

They as­

s im ila te d th e oontent o f German id e a lis m , p a sse d i t on through t r a n s l a t i o n , in te r p r e te d i t in classroom in s t r u c tio n , and e la b o ra te d i t in com m entaries.

There follow ed th e sta g e o f c r e a tiv e c r itic is m

and Independent c o n s tru c tio n i n which th e ground won by th e p io n e e rs was c o n s o lid a te d and extended and th e u n d e rly in g m etaphysics devel­ oped in new lin e s by men lik e B rad ley , B osanquet, McTaggart, P rin g le P a ttis o n and many o th e r s . A number o f n e o - id e a lis ts c o lla b o ra te d in producing E ssays in P h ilo s o p h ic a l C ritic is m (1883) in c lu d in g some o f th e ( a t t h a t tim e) younger members - A. S eth , H aldane, S o rle y , Henry Jones and R itc h ie . The work was d ed io ated to Green and th e p re fa c e by Edward C alrd r e ­ v e a ls t h a t i t c o n s titu te s something of a common m a n ife sto .

“The

w r ite r s o f t h i s volume ag ree in b e lie v in g th a t th e li n e o f i n v e s t i ­ g a tio n which philosophy must fo llo w , o r in which i t may b e expeoted to make most Im portant c o n trib u tio n s to th e i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e o f man, i s t h a t which was opened by Kant, and f o r th e s u c c e s s fu l pro­ se c u tio n o f which no one has done so much a s H egel. "2

He adds th a t

th e y wish to give th e works o f Kant and Hegel a f r e s h ex p ressio n and a new a p p lic a tio n , r e a liz in g th a t l i t e r a l acceptance by a d if ­ f e r e n t g e n e ra tio n in a d if f e r e n t country would be n e ith e r p o s s ib le 1 . Cf. R udolf Metz, & Hundred Y ears o f B r i t i s h P h ilo so p h y . pp> 237-58 f o r an acco u n t o f th e o r ig in and g e n e ra l course o f th e movement. Also c f . J . H. M uirhead, Id e a lis m , E ncyclopaedia B rita n n lo a , 1 1th e d itio n , Vol 14, p . 284 f o r an account o f th e s ta g e s o f developm ent. 2 . Quoted by Metz, oj>. d t . . p . 253.

80

n o r d e sira b le *

T h e ir purpose I s to show how th e p r in c ip le s o f an

I d e a l i s t i c philosophy may be brought to b e a r on th e v a rio u s pro­ blems of sc ie n c e , o f e t h ic s , and o f re lig io n * The movement g a th e re d momentum throughout th e l a t t e r h a l f of th e n in e te e n th cen tu ry u n t i l a t th e tu rn o f th e cen tu ry i t had a t­ ta in e d th e p o s itio n o f th e dom inating philo so p h y o f th e B r iti s h Is le s .

The p ro g re ss o f t h i s movement w ill now be tra c e d In g re a te r

d e ta il* I.

James £ • ESEZlSZL* James P. P e r r ie r (1808-64) was one o f th e f i r s t B r i t i s h th in k ­

e r s to reac h a sym pathetic u nd erstan d in g o f German philosophy and to use I t i n c o n s tru c tin g h is own system .

H is I n s t i t u t e s o f Meta­

p h y sic s (1854) has th r e e d iv is io n s : a th e o ry o f knowing, a theory o f ig n o ran ce, and a th e o ry o f b e in g .

The t r u t h th a t

•

along w ith w hatever any in te llig e n c e knows i t must, as th e ground o r c o n d itio n o f i t s knowledge, have some cognizance o f i t s e l f . . • ." 3

i s th e i d e a l i s t i c d o c trin e o f knowledge on which h i s whole

p h ilo s o p h ic a l system i s b ased .

P e r r ie r la y s s p e c ia l olaim to o r ig i­

n a l i t y f o r h is th e o ry o f ig n o ran ce, - th a t th e r e can be ignorance only o f t h a t o f which th e re can be knowledge.

In th e t h i r d d iv i­

sio n he reac h es th e co n clu sio n th a t *. • • • th e only tr u e r e a l and independent e x is te n c e s a re m in d s -to -g e th e r-w lth -th a t-w h ic h they-appreh en d , and t h a t th e only s t r i c t l y n e c e ssa ry a b s o lu te ex­ is te n c e i s a supreme b ein g and i n f i n i t e and e v e r la s tin g mind in sy n th e sis w ith a l l th in g s .? 4 P e r r i e r 's w ritin g s were a stim u lu s to th e i d e a l i s t i c movement. 3 . Quoted in a r t i c l e , J . P . P e r r i e r , E ncyclopaedia B rlta n n lo a . 11th E d itio n , V ol. X, p . 288. 4 . Loo, o l t .

81

i i . isalsHaJsaatji P rim a rily a th e o lo g ia n , Benjamin Jo w ett (1817-93) was a man o f wide c u ltu re and v a r ie d a c t i v i t i e s .

Of c h ie f concern to th e

h is to r y o f philosophy I s th e f a c t th a t he Induced a number o f h is stu d e n ts a t Oxford to study H e g e l's w r itin g s .

Thus he became th e

f i r s t m ed iato r o f German thought a t th e f u tu re home o f B r i t i s h Id e a lis m .

The seed he sowed found re c e p tiv e s o i l In th e minds of

h i s p u p ils and bore r i c h p h ilo s o p h ic a l f r u i t .

Green, Edward C alrd

and N e ttle s h ip , a l l p io n e e rs o f B r i t i s h Id e a lism , were In flu e n c e d by h is work and p e r s o n a lity as members o f B a l l l o l C o lleg e. I I I . Jams,fi H utchison g tl,rU h g The f i r s t r e a l attem p t to n a tu r a liz e German Id ealism In G reat B rita n was made by James H utchison 8 t l r l l n g (1820-1909).

His

S e c re t o f Hegel (1865) gave a new Im pulse and a new d ir e c tio n to B r i t i s h p h ilo so p h y . S t i r l i n g broke w ith a l l p re v io u s B r i t i s h p h ilo s o p h e rs .

He

reco g n ized Hume as a g r e a t th in k e r, b u t Kant had a p p ro p ria te d a l l t h a t was w orthw hile In Hume's le g ao y , henoe a l l succeeding B r iti s h p h ilo so p h e rs who drew from Hume were pumping from a dry w e ll.

He

had even l e s s sympathy f o r Darwinism and e v o lu tio n and s u b je c te d b o th to sev ere c r i t i c i s m .

He lik e w is e o r l t l c l z e d Hamilton f o r

having m lsunderstood Kant and H egel. I n th e p re lim in a ry n o tlo e to h i s g r e a t work S t i r l i n g says t h a t , "The s e c r e t o f Hegel may be In d ic a te d a t sh o rtestJ^ th u s: ;j; Hegel made e x p l ic i t th e o o n crete u n iv e rs a l t h a t was I m p lic it In

82

K a n t.“5

S t i r l i n g was profoundly convinced o f th e tr u t h o f th e

H egelian system and s e t h im self th e ta s k o f e x p la in in g and defend­ in g i t .

"In H eg e l's c o n s tru c tio n he found a method and p o in t of

view which J u s t i f i e d th e fundam ental id e a s o f r e lig io n , and, a t th e same tim e, made c l e a r th e o n e-sid ed n ess o f th e co n cep tio n s o f th e 'ag e o f enlightenm ent* a t th e end o f which Kant sto o d , . . . ."® To him Hegel was th e r e c o n c ile r o f philosophy and r e lig io n and he I n te r p r e te d th e H egelian id e a lism i n a t h e i s t i c sen se. Hence he never t i r e d of e x to llin g Hegel a s th e p h ilo s o p h ic a l champion of C h r is tia n ity . 'The H egelian system su p p o rts and g iv e s e f f e c t to every claim o f t h i s r e l i g i o n ; ' h is view s 'con­ c i l i a t e them selves adm irably w ith th e r e v e la tio n o f th e New T estam e n t.' H egel, l i k e K ant, d ir e c ts every step o f h is sys­ tem to proving th e im m o rtality o f th e so u l, th e freedom o f th e w i l l , and th e e x iste n c e o f God.” The success o f S t i r l i n g 's work was due la r g e ly to t h i s i n t e r ­ p r e ta tio n o f th e u n io n between philosophy and r e lig i o n .

The o rth o ­

dox in theolo g y welcomed i t as a weapon w ith which th ey co u ld com­ b a t n a tu ra lis m , m a te ria lism and Darwinism. IV.

Thomas H ill G reen. One o f th o se who b u i l t most s u c c e s s fu lly on th e fo u n d atio n

l a i d by S t i r l i n g was Thomas H ill Green (1836-92).

Green had Jo w ett

a s a t u t o r a t Oxford and i t was Jo w ett who gave Green th e im pulse to study Kant and H egel. In adv o catin g id e a lis m Green opposed em piricism , u t i l i t a r i a n i s m and n a tu ra lis m .

G re e n 's m ission seems to have been to c l e a r away th e

5 . Quoted in a r t i c l e , J . H. S t i r l i n g , Tgnftvalonaedia B r ita n n lc a . 11th E d itio n , V ol. 25, p . 924. 6 . W. R. S o rley , & H isto ry o f B r i t i s h P hilo so p h y , p . 278. 7 . Metz, o l t . . p . 267.

83

o ld system s and to p re p a re th e way f o r a new I d e a l i s t i c syn­ th e s is . G re en 's d o c trin e ac co rd in g ly b e a rs i n c o n te n t and ex p ressio n a l ik e th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c mark and savour o f th a t Id e a lism whioh has liv e d on alm ost unbroken from th e G reek's to th e modem s, • • . • I n th e c o n s tru c tio n o f i t he drew on th e i d e a l i s t i c system s o f P la to and A r i s t o t l e , on th e e th ic s of C h r is tia n ity , on B e rk e le y 's th e o c e n trio m etaphysio . • • •, and most o f a l l on th e c r i t i c a l Id e a lism o f Kant and th e a b s o lu te Id e a lism o f Hegel; • • . *8 A.

flggga'a Mg.tflPfry.glQg.

G re e n 's system o f thought i s composed o f two p r ln o ip a l p a r ts - m etaphysics and e t h i c s .

H is m etaphysics i s based on a th e o ry o f

knowledge and h is e th ic s is s u e s in to a p o l i t i c a l p h ilo so p h y . "G reen 's system , th e n , i s about th e n a tu re o f r e a l i t y , man as a p erso n o r m oral b e in g , s o c ie ty o r th e S ta te a s a m u lt ip lic ity o f such b e in g s , and God a s th e b ein g from whom a l l th e r e s t d e riv e t h e i r m eaning."9 The d i s t i n c t i v e f e a tu re o f G reen 's eplstem ology i s h i s doc­ tr in e of re la tio n s .

Whether an y th in g i s r e a l depends n o t on an

I s o la t e d f a c t o r f a c t s , b u t r a th e r on th e r e l a t i o n s o f f a c t s to one a n o th e r. There a re many such r e la tio n s as cause and e f f e c t , s im ila r it y o r c o n tr a s t, o p p o sitio n , and so on.

Things have no

meaning f o r u s a p a rt from th e se r e la tio n s h ip s . The form ula t h a t r e la tio n s c o n s titu te r e a l i t y a c q u ire s mean­ in g , acco rd in g to G reen, when i t i s added t h a t th e s e r e l a t i o n s a re i n s t i t u t e d by some u n itin g p r in c ip l e . 8 . I b i d . p . 272. 9 . I b i d . p . 273.

Since n o th in g can e n te r in to

84

knowledge t h a t l a u n r e la te d to co n scio u sn ess, t h i s u n itin g p r in ­ c i p le must he an a c t i v i t y o f co n scio u sn ess.

T his combining agency

cannot he th e In d iv id u a l mind which I s lim ite d to i t s own p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d o f ex p erien ce, i t s p lao e i n n a tu re and i t s moment i n h is to r y . We must suppose, th e r e f o r e , th a t th e combining I n te llig e n c e which c r e a te s th e r e a l system o f n a tu re , as d is tin g u is h e d from t h a t o f o u r p r iv a te and lim ite d s e lv e s , i s an 'e t e r n a l i n t e l l i g e n c e ', which determ ines n a tu re I n advance o f o u r in ­ d iv id u a l human acq u ain tan ce w ith i t , and 'p a r t i a l l y and g ra d u a lly rep ro d u ces I t s e l f in u s . ' T his d iv in e mind, which c o n s titu te s th e u n iv e rs a l system o f r e a l i t y , i s n o t i t s e l f s u b je c t to any o f th e r e l a t i o n a l c a te g o rie s which i t produces; and i f we speak o f i t as a 'c a u s e ', we must u n d erstan d t h i s term i n th e u n iq u e sense o f t h a t f re e and spontaneous a c t i v i t y w ith which we a r e ac q u ain ted in our own th o u g h t.10 G re en 's E te rn a l Consciousness sometimes h as th e a s p e c t o f K a n t's Reason, sometimes H e g e l's S p i r i t , and sometimes B e rk e le y 's God.

The t h e l s t i c elem ent in G re en 's philo so p h y served to popu­

l a r i z e th e renew al o f id e a lism and a ffo rd e d orthodox th eo lo g y w ith a welcome weapon i n i t s s tru g g le a g a in s t m a te ria lism and n a tu ra lis m . B.

G reen 's E th ic s

One o f G reen 's emphases i n h is e th ic s i s t h a t man i s n o t only a c h ild o f n a tu re , b u t a c re a tu re o f God as w e ll.

I t may be tr u e

o f th e p h y s ic a l organism th a t th e human ra c e has developed from p u re ly anim al l i f e by an u n in te lli g e n t p ro c e ss o f n a tu r a l s e le c tio n . However, th e r e a l man, th e e s s e n ti a l s e l f , tra n sc e n d s n a tu re i n t h a t he can know and p a r t i c i p a t e in t h a t "oombining in te llig e n c e " which c o n s titu te s n a tu r e . h as a m oral w i l l .

Han a ls o tra n sc e n d s n a tu re i n t h a t he"

"What, th en , i s t h i s m oral w ill which i s i n each

10. R. B. P e rry , P hilosophy g t tfea Recent P a s t , p . 128

85

one o f us?

The answer i s to be found ag a in in th e im p lic a tio n o f

an e te r n a l mind, which 'reproduces* i t s e l f i n man a s th a t a s p ira ­ t i o n to p e r f e c tio n o r to th e a b s o lu te ly b e s t , whioh i s c h a ra c te r ­ i s t i c o f ou r moral co n scio u sn e ss.

The m oral w ill i s th e w illin g

by man o f God's w i l l . " 11 I n c o n sid e rin g th e e th ic a l end, Green r e j e c t s Hedonism. P le a su re may accompany th e a tta in m e n t o f th e e t h ic a l end, b u t i t cannot be th e e th io a l end i t s e l f .

• th e p le a s a n tn e s s o f

an a tta in e d good depends on th e goodness o f t h i s good, n o t th e goodness on th e p le a s a n tn e s s i t b r i n g s ."12 The tr u e e th io a l end i s th e r e a l i z a t i o n o f th e tr u e s e l f . I t s f i r s t p r in c ip le i s th e a b s o lu te v alu e o f human p e rs o n a lity * I t r e q u ir e s a ls o th e e q u a lity and b ro th erh o o d o f a l l men. tr u e end can only be found in . . .

"The

• (th e ) s p i r i t u a l s e l f • •

. .; i t i s a s a t i s f a c t i o n 'on th e w h o le ,' a permanent w e ll-b e in g t h a t c o n s is ts in th e f u l l r e a l iz a tio n o f human pow ers, and t h a t does n o t p a ss away th e r e f o r e w ith t h i s o r t h a t tr a n s i to r y f e e lin g . "13 C h r is t ia n i ty , in i t s d o c trin e o f human e q u a lity and b ro th erh o o d , b e s t embodies t h i s id e a l* V. Edward C alrd . Because he was O r r 's p ro fe s s o r a t Glasgow, th e work of Edward C alrd , (1835-1908) i s o f s p e c ia l s ig n if ic a n c e .

As Green had made

Oxford th e stro n g h o ld o f Id ealism i n England, so C alrd made Glasgow th e stro n g h o ld o f id e a lis m i n S co tla n d .

D uring th e tw enty-seven

11* IE L £ ., p . 129. 1 2 . Metz, 2£* c i t . . p . 281. 13* A. K. Rogers, E n g lish and American P hilosophy Since 1800. p . 225.

86

y e a rs he serv ed as th e P ro fe ss o r o f Moral Philosophy a t Glasgow an e n t ir e g e n e ra tio n o f n e o - id e a lis ts grew u p .

H is s e rv ic e to

id e a lism was crowned hy fo u rte e n y e a rs a s M aster o f B a l l i o l a t Oxford. The d i s t i n c t i v e ta s k whioh C alrd perform ed in n a tu r a liz in g th e German thought was th a t o f m e d ia to r.14

S t i r l i n g had o nly "been

p a r t i a l l y su c c e s sfu l i n fin d in g an E n g lish e q u iv a le n t f o r th e id io m o f H egel.

Green m ingled h is own th o u g h ts, as w e ll as th o se which

came to him from o th e r so u rces, w ith th e d o c trin e s o f Kant and H egel.

Uen l i k e B rad ley , Bosanquet and McTaggart could n o t a c t

a s m ed iato rs because th e y tran sfo rm ed and extended German id e alism aooording to t h e i r own id e a s .

I t was E. C alrd , who, w ith th e en­

thusiasm o f a genuine d is c ip le , a rem arkable g i f t f o r c l e a r expres­ sio n and an a t t r a c t i v e p e r s o n a lity , f a i t h f u l l y tra n s m itte d th e thought o f Kant and Hegel to h is fellow -countrym en. I t was C a ird 's c o n v ic tio n th a t th e most im p o rtan t elem ents of H e g e l's a b s o lu te id e a lis m could f i r s t be d isc o v ered i n K a n t's c r i t i ­ c a l id e a lis m .

A lthough most o f h is w ritin g s were devoted to Kant,

he always measured K a n t's d o c trin e s by th e H egelian s ta n d a rd .

He

a ls o used H egelianism a s th e c r i t e r i o n by whioh to i n t e r p r e t th e movement o f p h ilo s o p h ic a l and r e lig i o u s th o u g h t, and a s a weapon w ith which to combat m a te ria lism and ag n o sticism . A.

D e fin itio n o£ Development

Because o f i t s s im ila r ity to th e d i a l e c t i c a l a sc e n t o f th e 1 4 . Cf. Metz, £>£• o l t . . p'. 287 f f .

87

H egelian c a te g o rie s , he was sym pathetic tow ard S p en ce r's concep­ tio n o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n and I n te g r a tio n . p la y ed a prom inent p a r t In h is p h ilo so p h y .

The Id e a o f development H is d e f in itio n o f

development I s a s y n th e s is o f th e views o f Hegel and Spencer: " . • • • development I s a p ro cess a t once o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n and in te g r a tio n , I . e . a p ro c e ss In which d iffe re n c e o o n tln u a lly In ­ c re a s e s , n o t a t th e expense o f u n ity h u t In suoh a way t h a t th e u n ity a ls o I s deepened."15 B.

C a ir d 's Conception of th p A b so lu te.

C a ir d 's co nception o f development and o f th e A bsolute a re c lo s e ly r e la te d .

In I n te r p r e tin g C alrd , H etz say s,

W ithout th e g r e a t id e a o f I d e n t i t y I n d if fe re n c e th o u g h t cannot tak e a s in g le ste p forw ard tow ards p h ilo s o p h ic a l t r u t h . . . . . The d if fe re n c e I s a s e s s e n ti a l a s th e u n ity , f o r th e u n ity sought i n p h ilosophy i s an In d iv id u a l u n ity t h a t main­ ta i n s I t s e l f n o t sim ply d e s p ite th e u n d e rly in g d if fe re n c e , b u t i n and th ro u g h i t , overcoming c o n tr a s ts and c o n f l i c t s only to d is s o lv e ag ain I n h ig h e r ones, and th e n to reco v e r i t s e l f a t a s t i l l h ig h e r l e v e l . I t I s th e o rg a n ic u n ity which we are o b lig e d to th in k th e u n iv e rse to b e . I t i s th e s p i r i t u a l p r in ­ c ip le immanent I n a l l th in g s ; I t i s th e A b so lu te.16 C a ir d 's conception o f th e A bsolute d if f e r e d from th a t o f th e younger H eg elian s.

Whereas he thought o f I t as a dynamic p ro cess

u n fo ld in g i t s e l f d l a l e e t i c a l l y , th ey thought o f i t as s t a t i c and In c a p a b le o f developm ent.

c.

gftiEto EMAmpfrr aL

L ike most o f th e e a r ly n e o - id e a lis ts , C alrd gave H e g e l's views a t h e l s t i c em phasis.

He p o sse sse d a deeply r e lig io u s n a tu re and

1 5 . Quoted by Metz, p p . o l t . pp . 290-291. 1 6 . I b i d . p p . 289-90.

88

■believed th a t C h r is tia n ity was th e h ig h e s t r e a l i z a t i o n o f th e r e ­ lig io u s co n scio u sn ess. C a ir d 's philosophy o f r e lig io n i s s e t f o r t h in h is G iffo rd L e c tu re s on The E v o lu tio n o f R e lig io n (1893).

I t i s b ased upon

H egelian id e a s and ex p ressed i n H egelian term s, b u t i t a ls o oont a l n s a tr a o e o f S p e n c e r's conception o f e v o lu tio n .

H ere, a s in

o th e r phases o f h i s p h ilo so p h y , th e fundam ental id e a i s th e p r in ­ c i p le o f u n ity .

R e lig io n i s *• • • • th e more o r l e s s developed

conscio u sn ess o f th a t i n f i n i t e u n ity whioh l i e s beyond a l l th e cleav ag es o f th e f i n i t e , e s p e c ia lly i t s cleav ag e in to s u b je c t and o b je c t.

God i s ac co rd in g ly d e fin e d a s th e p r in c ip le o f u n ity i n

a l l th in g s , and as a s e lf-c o n s c io u s and s e lf-d e te rm in in g b e in g .*1? As f o r man, "Only in th e D ivine Being do f i n i t e th in g s a t t a i n tr u e r e a l i t y and s ig n ific a n c e a s elem ents in th e r e v e la tio n and s e l f r e a l i z a t i o n o f th e supreme principle.*18 He h as th e c a p a c ity to lo o k outw ards to g ain a knowledge o f th e w orld, to look inw ard to g a in a knowledge o f h im s e lf, and to look upward to th e D ivine Being i n whom th e in n e r and th e o u te r w orlds a re u n ite d . There have been th r e e sta g e s in th e e v o lu tio n o f th e r e lig io u s co n scio u sn ess - th e o b je c tiv e - re p re s e n te d by pantheism , th e sub­ j e c t i v e - re p re se n te d by p o ly th eism , and th e a b s o lu te - re p re se n te d by C h r is t ia n i ty .

I n C h r is tia n ity th e r e lig io u s co n scio u sn ess a t ­

t a i n s i t s supreme f u lf ilm e n t. V I. John C alrd 1 7 . I b i d . p . 292 1 8 . Loc. o i t .

1

89

The in flu e n o e o f John C alrd (1820-98) p e n e tra te d c h ie f ly In to th e th e o lo g ic a l c i r c l e s o f Scotland*

L ike h i s younger b r o th e r Ed­

ward, he p o ssessed th e a b i l i t y to g iv e u n te c h n lc a l and p o p u la r ex p ressio n to H e g e l's Ideas*

In h is philosophy of r e lig io n he aimed

to r e c o n c ile and u n ify f a i t h and knowledge, r e lig i o n and philosophy* V II. W illiam W allace. In h is philosophy o f r e lig io n W illiam W allace (1844-97) u ses Id e a lism to support r e lig i o n .

With him, as w ith o th e r B r i t i s h

H eg e lian s, Id ealism Is s u e s In th e ism .

He reg ard ed th e In c a rn a tio n

n o t as a unique h i s t o r i c a l f a c t , b u t as an e te r n a l tru th * I t meant

To him

. th e v is i b le m a n ife s ta tio n o f C od's Immanence In

man, o f th e s p i r i t u a l In th e m a te r ia l, o f th e e te r n a l In th e tem­ p o r a l.

Man I s n e ith e r a mere o ffs h o o t o f n a tu r e , a s M a te r ia lis ts

w i l l have I t , nor a p u re c h ild o f heaven, a s th e P la to n l s ts say, b u t th e J o in t pro d u ct o f n a tu r a l and s p i r i t u a l f o rc e s ." ^ 9 V I I I . Henrv Jo n e s. S ir Henry Jones (1852-1922) serv ed Id e a lism , n o t as an in d e­ pendent th in k e r, b u t as an e n th u s ia s tic exponent.

A s tu d e n t, d is ­

c i p l e and su ccesso r o f Edward C alrd , he co n sid ered h im se lf as th e stew ard and guardian o f th e I d e a l i s t i c o u tlo o k o f th e o ld e r Hege­ lia n s .

He n o ted th e d iffe re n c e between th e e a r l i e r and l a t e r

te n d e n c ie s o f th e n e o - ld e a lis t school and c r i t i c i z e d th e views o f B radley and Bosanquet a s d e p a rtu re s from orthodox H egelianism . Metz has p o in te d o u t th e agreem ent between J o n e s ' te a c h in g and th e view s o f th e e a rly B r i t i s h I d e a l i s t s . 1 9 . I b id . » . 298.

90

I n him we meet a g a in , c le v e rly reh an d led , a l l th e f a m ilia r item s o f d o c trin e - th e c o r r e l a t i v i t y o f thought and b e in g , o f th e id e a l and th e r e a l , o f th e s p i r i t u a l and th e n a tu r a l; th e r e c o n c ilia tio n o f o p p o site s i n th e s u p e rio r and a l l comprehending u n ity o f th e Whole; th e s p i r i t u a l s tr u c tu r e o f th e u n iv e rse ; th e e x tir p a tio n o f a l l duiO-isms as f a l s e ab­ s tr a c tio n s ; th e ex p lain in g away o f th e co n tin g en t and i r r a ti o n a l ; th e id e a o f coherent system; th e a b s o lu te w ith a l l i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c q u a l itie s and fu n c tio n s ; th e immanence o f God i n n a tu re and man, th e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f Him w ith th e a b s o lu te ; th e p e r s o n a lity o f God; th e f u lfilm e n t o f m o ra lity i n r e lig io n ; f a c i l e m etaphysical optim ism; and so f o r t h . 20 IX . F ra n c is H erbert B rad ley . The w ritin g s o f F ra n c is H erb ert B radley (1846-1924) gave a new d ir e o tio n to th e i d e a l i s t i c movement o f th e n in e te e n th c e n tu ry . The e a r l i e r H egelians had in te r p r e te d th e main p r in c ip le of th e H egelian system , t h a t th e r e a l i s th e r a t i o n a l , in th e sense th a t th e u l t i ­ mate essence o f th e w orld i s s e lf-c o n s c io u s in te llig e n c e whose n a tu re i s r e f le c te d t r u l y , though in a d e q u a te ly , i n th e f i n i t e m ind.21 They were advooates r a t h e r th an c r i t i c s o f th e b e l i e f i n God, f re e ­ dom and im m o rta lity . B radley gave H e g e l's p r in c ip le a d if f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .

He

ac ce p ted th e i d e a l i s t i c th e s is th a t th e w orld i s a r a tio n a l w orld, b u t r e je c te d •thought" as a synonym f o r r e a l i t y . dam ental f a c t f o r h im 'is "e x p erien c e". and i t s bein g c o n s is ts in ex p erien ce.

I n s te a d , th e fun­

There i s b u t one r e a l i t y , Rogers an aly zes B ra d le y 's

thought as b ein g b ased on two p re s u p p o s itio n s , ” . • • • th a t th e only n o tio n we can g e t o f r e a l i t y i s in th e form o f e x p e rien ce , a f t e r th e type th a t r e v e a ls i t s e l f in immediate f e e lin g ; and th a t 20. I b i d . p . 303. 21. C f. J . H. M uirhead, H egel, E ncyclopaedia B rlta n n lc a . 1 1 th v E d itio n , V ol. 13, p . 207.

91

t h i s ex p erien ce I s In th e end a s in g le ex p erien ce, th e r e a l i t y t h a t tra n sc e n d s th e p re s e n t s t a t e of f e e lin g Jo in in g on co n tin u ­ o usly to I t s edges, and forming w ith I t an Immediate f e e lin g whole*“22

«. . . , r e a l i t y I s a u n ita r y and s e lf - c o n s is te n t

whole o f ex p erien ce, * . . ,*25 Metz d isc o v e rs th r e e le v e ls i n B ra d le y 's w orld-view . The lo w est i s th e realm o f immediate f e e lin g , th e p r e - r e l a tl o n a l experience o f u n d iv id ed and u n d if f e r e n tia te d whole­ ness* The n ex t I s th e d i a l e c t i c a l l e v e l , th e realm o f th o u g h t, i n which th e o r ig in a l u n ity o f f e e lin g i s broken up by r e l a t i o n s , and th in g s a re appearances o nly and n o t re a l* The t h i r d i s th e realm o f r e a l i t y , of th e A bsolute, in which th e u n ity and wholeness l o s t a t th e second sta g e a re recon­ s t i t u t e d in a h ig h e r synthesis*2^ Since r e a l i t y i s n o n - r e la tio n a l, th e A bsolute i s n e ith e r a sum o f f i n i t e minds n o r a s e lf-c o n s c io u s mind, f o r th e form er im­ p l i e s e x te r n a l r e la tio n s and th e l a t t e r i n t e r n a l r e l a t i o n s * The A bsolute i s th e u ltim a te end which a l l th in g s seek* preme c r i t e r i o n o f a l l valu e* 26 f u l b e a u tif u l, and th e good good.

I t i s th e su­

I t makes th e tr u e tr u e , th e b e a u ti­ I t r e q u ire s n o th in g o u ts id e of

i t to com plete i t s being* The A bsolute i s a h ig h e r m etap h y sical whole than th e God of re lig io n .

M o rality and r e lig io n b o th f a l l w ith in th e sphere o f

"appearance" and have no a b so lu te tru th * X.

gffirparfl Bosanouet. There i s a d o s e k in sh ip between th e p h ilo so p h y o f B ernard

Bosanquet (1848-1923) and th a t o f Bradley* 22. 23* 24* 25.

BosanqUet developed

A. X* R ogers, E n g lish and American P hilosophy Since 1800. p . 251* Loo* c i t * Metz, o p * o l t * . p . 540. Cf* A r t ic le B rad ley , F* H*, E ncyclopaedia B rlta n n lo a . 1 4th E d itio n , V ol. 3, p . 1008* 26* M etz, o2 * c i t . . p* 344.

92

e x te n s iv e ly what B radley had developed I n te n s iv e ly .

He a p p lie d

B r a d le y 's w orld-view to a e s th e tic s , psychology, lo g ic , epistem ology, e th ic s and th e p h ilosophy o f r e lig i o n , law and th e estate* The c e n te r o f B o san q u et's p h ilo so p h y i s h is co n cep tio n o f in ­ d iv id u a lit y in I t s u ltim a te m etap h y sical s ig n ific a tio n *

H is view

o f in d iv id u a lity i s a sy stem a tic whole ex p ressin g i t s e l f i n every p a rt*

He does n o t ta k e th e common view o f in d iv id u a lity a s some­

th in g s e p a ra te , p e o u lla r and unique in th e sense o f b ein g a p a r t i ­ c u la r d is tin g u is h e d from o th e r p a r t i c u l a r s , b u t in th e sense th a t th e re i s only one th in g th a t com pletely ex p resses th e n a tu re o f in d iv i d u a li ty , namely th e A bsolute*27 to ta lity *

I t i s th e u n iv e rse i n i t s

I t i s a lik e th e goal o f knowledge, th e end o f conduct

and th e supreme o b je c t o f ad m ira tio n and devotion*28 X I.

Ifclflggfrrt E l l i s McTaggart. A lthough he was c o n sid e ra b ly younger th an James O rr, John

McTaggart E l l i s McTaggart (1866-1925) i s m entioned h e re because he re p r e s e n ts in th e p h ilosophy of r e lig io n a d i s t i n c t p o s itio n i n B r i t i s h idealism *

The e a r l i e s t r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f th e movement

u sed id e a lis m a s a se rv a n t o f r e lig io n *

L a te r men, l i k e B radley

and B osanquet, m ain tain ed a more o r l e s s n e u tr a l a ttitu d e *

McTag^

g a r t took th e f i n a l s te p i n d is s o lv in g th e a lle g ia n c e betw een th e­ ology and id e a lism by developing an a t h e i s t i c d o c trin e on H egelian p r in c ip le s * The tho u g h t around which M cT aggart'8 e n t ir e system i s o rganized 354* 28* Cf* R ogers, op,* o l t . p . 265*

93

I s h is prim ary p h ilo s o p h ic a l c o n v ic tio n th a t th e re I s n o th in g t r u l y r e a l except f i n i t e persons,29

The s e l f i s a s p i r i t u a l sub­

sta n c e e x is tin g e n t i r e l y i n I t s own r i g h t . In clu d e d i n any o th e r s e l f .

The s e l f cannot be

N e ith e r can I t be In clu d ed I n th a t

h ig h e r u n ity whioh philosophy c a l l s th e A bsolute and which r e lig io n c a l l s God.

I n i t s essen ce th e s e l f I s su b je c t to no change.

e x i s ts from e t e r n ity to e t e r n ity . and i t can never be d e stro y e d .

It

I t can n ev er have been c re a te d

I t i s im m ortal.

There I s no n e c e ssa ry connection between t h i s d o c trin e o f Im­ m o r ta lity and b e l i e f i n God. As we have seen, th e re cannot be any h ig h e r le v e l o f person­ a l i t y than th a t o f f i n i t e s e lv e s , • • . . ; th e A b so lu te, . • . • i s c e r ta in ly Im personal; and to c a l l t h i s im personal p r in ­ c i p le God would be obviously in a p p ro p r ia te . I f , however, we do n o t I d e n tif y th e A bsolute and God, what id e a s rem ain to be a tta c h e d to th e l a t t e r ? In view of th e e v il in th e w orld, as w ell a s on o th e r grounds, th e co nception of th e p e r f e c t good­ n ess and omnipotence o f God cannot be J u s t i f i e d . We could only save th e m oral o h a ra c te r o f God by supposing H is power to be lim ite d , and th e r e s u lt a n t conception o f God s t r iv in g a f t e r th e good and v ic to r io u s ly reac h in g i t i s , Indeed, much more s a tis f y in g th an th a t o f a p e r f e c t ly good God, and more p ro b ab le as w e ll. Again, God cannot be th e C re a to r, f o r , as we have a ls o n o te d , f i n i t e p erso n s a re e t e r n a l. The o nly con­ c e p tio n , th e n , t h a t seems s u s c e p tib le o f any J u s t i f i c a t i o n , i s o f a God who i s n e i th e r om nipotent n o r c r e a tiv e , and th e only reaso n why we should not b e lie v e i n th e e x iste n c e o f guch a God i s th a t th e re i s no r a t i o n a l ground f o r doing so.®® Thus he reduces th e id e a o f th e e x iste n c e o f God to an u t t e r l y su p e rflu o u s assum ption. X II. The R e la tio n o f James Orr to th e N e o -Id e a lis t Movement. James Orr was a contemporary o f most o f th e r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f th e i d e a l i s t movement i n B r ita in . 29f Cf. Metz, op. c i t . . p p . 376-8. 3 0 . Loo.

He was a p u p il o f Edward C alrd,

94

one o f th e e a r l i e s t and most i n f l u e n t i a l exponents o f Neo-Hegelian­ ism .

He sp en t a la r g e p o rtio n o f h is l i f e i n Glasgow, th e stro n g ­

h o ld o f id e a lis m in S co tlan d . A.

The R e la tio n o f James O rr to th e 8ouroes o f th e Neo-I d e a l i s t Movement.

I t was c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f O rr th a t when he d e a lt w ith a problem he tra c e d i t to i t s s o u rc e s .31

J u s t as in d e a lin g w ith emprlcism

he went bach to Hume, so in c o n sid e rin g Id e a lism he went back to i t s so u rces i n Kant and H egel. 1 . Orr*s R e la tio n to K ant. There a re many p o in ts o f agreem ent between O r r 's p o s itio n and t h a t o f K ant.

T his i s e s p e c ia lly ev id en t i n h is volume David Hume.

I n h is c r i t i c a l exam ination o f Hume and h is In flu e n c e on philosophy and theology O rr fre q u e n tly makes use o f K a n t's c r iti c is m s . eplstem ology he ag ree s w ith Kant

In

• th a t th e re can be no

knowledge o f any k in d except on th e su p p o sitio n o f a p r in c ip le o f s y n th e s is in co nsciousness . . ; ." S 2

and a ls o t h a t " . . . . th e re

i s no su b je c t-c o n sc io u sn e ss which h as n o t as i t s in v a r ia b le co u n ter­ p a r t an o b je c t-c o n s c io u s n e s s .33

The flaw i n K a n t's th e o ry o f know­

led g e i s t h a t he h e ld t h a t th e p r in c ip le s which we employ i n know­ led g e a re only p r in c ip le s o f our own th o u g h t, and n o t th e p r in c ip le s which c o n s titu te th e w orld i t s e l f . p o s itio n .

T his i s e s s e n ti a ll y H e g e l's

A nother p o in t in whioh O rr ag rees w ith Kant i s in th e

s o lu tio n o f th e problem o f th e r e a l i t y o f th e e x te rn a l w orld. "Kant 31. Cf. James Denny, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr, The B r i t i s h Weekly. S ep t. 11, 1913, p . 576. 32. O rr, David Hume, p . 112. 33. I b i d . p p . 114—5 .

95

f ix e s on th e tr u e id e a o f substance a s th a t o f a permanent subs l a tin g in th e m idst o f change, and p ro v es, we th in k i r r e f u t a b l y , t h a t t h i s id e a i s In v o lv ed in th e v ery p o s s i b i l i t y o f such expe­ rie n c e a s we h a v e ."34 There a re a ls o echoes o f K a n t's arguments f o r h is famous t r i l ­ ogy, God, freedom and Im m o rtality , i n O rr.

I n seeking th e s o lu tio n

to th e problem o f freedom he th in k s i t i s to be found i n l i n e w ith what Kant says o f c a u s a tio n as a categ o ry of n atu re.® 5 knows i t s e l f r a is e d above n a tu re .

The s e l f

"To i t belo n g s th e power, which

i s w anting in e x te rn a l n a tu re , o f d is tin g u is h in g I t s e l f from o b je c ts w ith o u t, and from d e s ir e s and p a s s io n s w ith in , and o f d eterm in in g i t s e l f f r e e ly i n l i g h t o f p r in c ip le s and ends.

Han, a s Kant says,

i s a b ein g th a t a c ts under re p r e s e n ta tio n of e n d s . "36 O rr a ls o makes u se o f K a n t's sta tem en ts i n th e p r e s e n ta tio n o f h i s argum ents f o r im m o rta lity .

He sa y s, "There i s th e f a c t th a t

th e s c a le o f man's n a tu re i s too la r g e f o r h is p re se n t scene o f e x is te n c e ................. Give a man a l l o f th e w orld he asks f o r , and he i s y e t u n s a t i s f i e d . "37

Then i n a fo o tn o te he quotes K a n t's s ta te ­

ment, "Han i s not so c o n s titu te d as to r e s t and be s a t i s f i e d i n any p o sse ssio n o r enjoyment w h atso ev er.*38 Im m o rtality may a ls o be in f e r r e d when we c o n s id e r l i f e from th e p o in t o f view o f m oral d is c ip lin e . E veryth in g whioh stre n g th e n s our view o f th e w orld a s a scene 54. 55. 56. 57. 58.

I b i d . p . 155. Of. I b i d . p . 141. {{OC« s i t . «. O rr, The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World, pp. 184-5. }|0£. sljl*

96

o f m oral government; ev ery th in g which le a d s u s to p u t a high v alu e on c h a ra c te r, and to h e lle v e t h a t th e C r e a to r 's main end in H is d e a lin g s w ith man I s to p u r if y and develop c h a ra o te r, stre n g th e n s a ls o our b e l i e f i n im m o rta lity . The only way we can conceive o f th e r e la tio n o f n a tu re to man, • • • . , i s , a s Kant has shown, to re p re s e n t i t to o u rse lv e s as a means to th e end o f h is o u ltu re and m o r a lity .39 A t h i r d c o n s id e ra tio n which p o in ts to im m o rtality i s th e mani­

f e s t incom pleteness o f th e p re s e n t l i f e b o th w ith re s p e c t to human c h a ra c te r and work and D ivine a d m in is tra tio n . " . . . . th e p re se n t l i f e , w ith i t s abounding anom alies, im p e rfe c tio n s, and i n e q u itie s , i s n o t God's l a s t word to u s; . . . .

th e re i s an o th er c h a p te r to

our e x iste n c e than th a t which d o s e s on e a r th .

Here comes in the

c o n s id e ra tio n whioh Kant urges o f th e need o f prolonged e x iste n c e to com plete th e f u lfilm e n t o f our m oral d e s tin y ; . . .

."4 0

re fe re n c e i s to th e fo llo w in g statem en t by K ant. "In view o f th e D ivine wisdom, and h aving re s p e c t to th e sp le n d id endowment o f human n a tu re , and to th e sh o rtn ess o f l i f e , so in ad eq u ate f o r i t s developm ent, we can f in d an eq u a lly s a tis f a c to r y ground f o r a d o c tr in a l f a i t h in th e f u tu re l i f e o f th e numan s o u l.41 A p o in t a t whioh O rr d i f f e r s from Kant i s th e e s tim a te he p u ts on th e v alu e o f th e th e o r e tic arguments f o r th e e x iste n c e o f Ok>d. Whereas Kant su b je c te d them to a sev ere c r iti c is m , O rr c o n s id e rs them to p o sse ss h igh v a l i d i t y . much im portance • . . .

He say s, ". • • • I do n o t a tta c h

to o b je c tio n s to th e s e p ro o fs drawn from

K a n t's p e c u lia r th eo ry o f know ledge."42

The v alu e o f th e th e o r e tic

p ro o fs depends upon t h e i r cum ulative e f f e c t . 39. 40. 41. 42.

I b i d . p . 186. I b i d . p . 187. Loc. c i t . I b i d . p . 113.

Each depends on th e

97

o th e rs , -

. • . a s th e design argument presupposes th e cosmo­

lo g ic a l , to g iv e u s th e id e a o f an i n f i n i t e and n ecessary Being a t th e b a s is o f th e u n iv e rs e , so b o th o f th e s e arguments need th e o n to lo g ic a l, to show us i n th e c le a r e s t and most convincing manner t h a t t h i s Being and Cause o f th e u n iv e rse i s i n f i n i t e , s e lf- c o n ­ sc io u s R easo n .1,43 The th r e e arguments c o n s titu te an In se p a ra b le u n ity . When i t comes to th e moral argument f o r th e e x iste n c e o f God, O rr a c c e p ts a l l th a t Kant says o f God as a p o s tu la te of th e .m o ra l co n sciousness and th en c a r r ie s th e argument f u r th e r so th a t through i t he re a c h e s a co nception o f God as th e e t h ic a lly p e r f e c t Being, th e source and ground o f moral t r u t h and th e fo u n ta in o f m oral la w .44 In g e n e ra l th e re i s a r a th e r c lo se a f f i n i t y between th e p o si­ tio n s o f O rr and K ant.

O rr u t i l i z e s K a n t's arguments w herever

p o s s ib le to stre n g th e n h is theism , fre q u e n tly he goes beyond Kant i n th e d ir e c tio n o f th eism , and he d isa g re e s w ith Kant when th e l a t t e r c r i t i c i z e s th e t h e l s t i c p o s itio n . 2.

O r r 's R e la tio n to H egel. There i s no such marked r e la tio n s h ip o f s im ila r ity between th e

views o f O rr and H egel. th e view o f H egel.

In one Im p o rtan t r e s p e c t Orr does accep t

I n speaking o f God a s a p o s tu la te o f th e soul

he say s, " . . . . th e s o u l, as th in k in g s p i r i t , demands an i n f i n i t e o b je c t..................We cannot e r r i n seeking w ith Hegel th e d eep est ground o f m an's c a p a c ity f o r r e lig i o n in h is p o sse ssio n o f th e power o f th o u g h t.

The power o f thought i s n o t th e whole of r e l i g i o n , b u t

4 3 . I b i d . p . 123. 44. Of. I b i d . pp . 129-33.

98

i t I s t h a t which g iv e s mem h is c a p a c ity f o r r e l i g i o n . 1,45 I n em other connection he sa y s, "Hegel was r i g h t when he a ffirm e d t h a t i t i s only as th in k in g s p i r i t th a t mem has th e o a p a c ity o f r e lig i o n a t a l l ; " emd he adds, "emd i f th e c o u n te r -th e o rie s o f th e u n iv e rse - M a t e r i a l i s t i c , F e m th e is tic , M o n istic - a re to he co n fu te d , i t must b e , . . . .

by . . .

• showing t h a t th e C h ris tia n

t h e i s t i c view i s th a t most in harmony w ith r i g h t reaso n , a s w ell a s b e s t e s ta b lis h e d by th e f a c t s o f r e l i g i o n . " ^ While he ag rees w ith Hegel i n t h i s b a s i c 'p o s i t i o n , i n o th e r re s p e c ts H e g e l's view s a re in ad eq u ate f o r O r r 's th eism .

One o f

H e g e l's in ad eq u acies i s h is ap p aren t f a i l u r e to a t t r i b u t e p e rs o n ­ a l i t y to God.47

O rr a ls o fin d s H e g e l's d e r iv a tio n o f th e u n iv e rse

i n term s of th e development o f an im personal Reason to be u n s a tis ­ f a c t o r y .4® H e g e l's th e o ry o f s in as a n ec essary sta g e i n th e tr a n ­ s i t i o n from anim al to human co nsciousness i s a ls o u n s a tis f a c to r y .4® B.

The R e la tio n o f .Tam^n O rr to S&J&gfr H eo-I d e a ll s t s .

O r r 's r e la tio n to th e B r i t i s h n e o - ld e a lls ts i s v ery s im ila r to h i s r e l a t i o n to H egel.

He ag rees w ith them in c e r ta in fundam ental

p r i n c i p l e s , b u t on th e whole fin d s th a t th e y have n o t gone f a r enough i n th e d ir e c tio n o f C h ris tia n theksm. 1 . O r r 's R e la tio n to Green. O rr a c c e p ts w h o leh earted ly th e fundam ental a s s e r tio n o f Green 45. I b i d . p . 135. 4 6 . O rr, The P ro g ress o f Dogma, 47. C f. O rr, The C h r is tia n View and 81 n As A Problem To-day, 48. Cf. O rr, £he C h r is tia n View 49. Cf. I b id . pp. 205, 497-8, and

p. of pp. of Sin

321. God and th e World, p . I l l , 471, 79-80. God and th e World, p . 147. as a Problem To-day, p p . 98- 9 .

99

t h a t " . . . • a l l e x i s ts i n and through th o u g h t, and has no mean­ in g o r r e a l i t y a p a rt from a th in k in g c o n s o l o u s n e s s " 5 0 I t to he unansw erable.

and c o n sid e rs

N e v e rth e less he r a is e s d e f in it e o b jections-

to o th e r a s p e c ts o f G reen 's view , and fin d s t h a t i t f a l l s f a r sh o rt o f a com plete theism . O r r 's o b je c tio n s a re le v e le d a t G reen 's d o c trin e o f God as an " E te rn a l Self-Consciousness"51 - th e au th o r and s u s ta ln e r o f th e system o f r e la tio n s which we c a l l th e u n iv e rse - which repro d u ces i t s e l f i n man. H is f i r s t o b je c tio n i s th a t th e d o c trin e o f an e te r n a l s e l f co n scio u sn ess I s Incom patible w ith tr u e theism because i t does n o t answer to any tr u e id e a o f God.

Orr sees a g r e a te r d i f f i c u l t y f o r

th e th e o ry In i t s p o s itio n th a t th e e te r n a l co n scio u sn ess i s com­ p le te ; t h a t i t undergoes no change and can re c e iv e no increm ent to i t s knowledge.

O r r 's o b je c tio n i s th a t th e r e l a t i o n s o f th in g s a re

changing from moment to moment and w hile i t may be tr u e , i n an id e a l se n se , t h a t f o r th e e te r n a l consciousness " th o s e r e la tio n s o f f a c t which form th e o b je o t o f our g ra d u a lly a tta in e d knowledge, alre ad y and e t e r n a lly ," i n a r e a l sense i t cannot be t r u e .

The crowning

d i f f i c u l t y , however, l i e s in th e r e la tio n o f th e e te r n a l conscious­ n e s s to th e f i n i t e s e l f .

O rr o b je c ts to th e p o s itio n th a t th e i n ­

d iv id u a l s e l f i s merged a lto g e th e r in th e u n iv e rs a l s e l f and th a t th e u n iv e rs a l s e l f reproduces I t s e l f in th e f i n i t e ego, on th e b a s is t h a t i t i s pantheism v e rg in g c lo s e ly on m a te ria lism . A p o in t in which O rr ag rees w ith Green i s i n h is re sta te m e n t 50. O rr. The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e W orld, p . 471. 51. Of. I b i d . pp. 74, 471-4, -and S in as a Problem To-day, p p . 80-2.

100

o f th e o n to lo g ic a l argum ent, th e k e rn e l o f whioh, acco rd in g to Green, i s th e a s s e r tio n th a t thought I s n ecessary p r iu s o f a l l t h a t i s - even o f a l l p o s s ib le o r oonoelvable e x is te n c e .52 2 . O r r 's R e la tio n to Calrd.* I t has a lre a d y been noted th a t C alrd was O r r 's I n s tr u c to r i n p hilosoph y in th e U n iv e rsity o f Glasgow.

As in th e th in k in g

o f C alrd, so in th e th in k in g o f O rr, Kant played, a more prom inent p a r t th an H egel.

In h is f i r s t g r e a t work, The C h ris tia n View o f

God, and, th e T o rld . O rr never c r i t i c i z e s C aird ad v e rsely b u t men­ tio n s him fre q u e n tly as an e x p o s ito r o f K ant.

However, i n Sin as

& Problem To-dav. seventeen y ea rs l a t e r , such c r itic is m s do appear. Orr took over a s much of C a ir d 's id e a lism as he co u ld harmo­ n iz e w ith th eism .

Fundamental to h is th in k in g i s th e p ro p o s itio n

. th a t th e u n iv e rs e , however co n stru e d , can n ever be d i­ v orced from in te lli g e n c e o r th o u g h t.

I t i s an i n t e l l i g i b l e system;

i s c o n s titu te d through in te llig e n c e ; e x is ts f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e ." 53 I n t h i s he and C aird a g re e . A nother p o in t o f agreement i s in t h e i r J o in t acceptance of K a n t's m oral argument f o r th e e x is te n c e o f God. sta tem en t o f th e argument in h is C h ris tia n

Orr quotes C a ird 's

V i e w .54

In two re s p e c ts O rr pronounces C a ird 's view as in a d e q u a te . O rr p o in ts o u t33 th a t w hile C aird speaks o f "th e d iv in e p r in c ip le o f a l l th in g s " as "a li v i n g God, th e in s p ir in g source and e te r n a l r e a l i z a t i o n o f th e m oral id e a l o f man* - "an i n t e l l i g e n t o r s e l f 5 2 . Cf. O rr, £h£ C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World, pp . 124-7, and S in as £ Problem To-dav. p p . 80-2. 53. O rr, David Hume, p . 164. 54. Cf. p p . 130—1 . 55. O rr, 81n as a Problem To-day, p . 81.

101

conscious b e in g ," y e t he argues a g a in s t ap p ly in g th e term "p erso n al" to God.

T his i s ' l n I t s e l f u n s a tis f a c to ry f o r C h ris tia n th e ism .

Moreover, t h i s view o f Cod i s n o t f i t t e d to s u s ta in a C h ris tia n doc­ t r i n e o f s in .

C a ir d 's p o s itio n 56 i s th a t s in i s th e n e g a tiv e stag e

i n a n ec essary movement o f s p i r i t , and th a t i t c a r r ie s i n i t th e p r in c ip le o f i t s own remedy in th e p o s itiv e Im pulse to a r e tu r n to goodness.

"The tu r b id it y o f th e w a te rs," say®;Caird, "only proves

t h a t th e an g el has come down to tro u b le them, and. th e Im portant th in g i s t h a t , when so troubled., th ey have a h e a lin g v i r t u e . "57 O rr d e c la re s th a t t h i s conception does n o t s a t i s f y th e d iv in e h o li­ n e ss o f th e C h ris tia n g o sp e l, n o r does i t remove th e consciousness o f g u i l t , b reak th e power o f s in , o r r e s to r e to h o lin e s s and peace. As i n th e case o f Green, so in th e case o f C alrd, O rr ag rees w ith h is b a s ic id e a lis m , b u t fin d s h is views in s u f f i c i e n t f o r C hris­ t i a n th eism . 3 . O r r 's R e la tio n to B rad ley . O rr u s u a lly r e f e r s to B ra d le y 's views w ith d is a p p ro v a l.

He

f in d s t h a t B ra d le y 's p r in c ip le s b rin g in to q u e stio n th e th r e e id e a s which Kant h e ld to be e s s e n tia l f o r m o ra lity - God, freedom and im­ m o r ta lity .

He h o ld s t h a t B ra d le y 's views o f th e A bsolute a r e a

subv ersio n of th e e t h ic a l c h a ra c te r o f th e Supreme.

They ch allen g e

n o t only th e moral i d e a l I t s e l f , b u t a ls o God as th e e te r n a l ground o f th a t i d e a l , to g e th e r w ith th e conceptions o f o b lig a tio n and a u th o r ity .

Thus he f in d s th a t B ra d le y 's view s a re q u ite in ad eq u ate

f o r bo th th e e th io s and m etaphysics o f th eism . 56. I b i d . p p . 83-4. 287-8. 57. Quoted by O rr, I b i d . p . 41.

102

4.

O r r 's R e la tio n to McTaggart. O rr f in d s h is own theism d i r e c t l y opposed to McTaggart*s

"ath eism ".

McTaggart d ir e c te d h is arguments a g a in s t th e o rd in ary

d o c trin e s o f God, freedom and im m o rtality - th e p o s itio n s which O rr was I n te r e s te d in m a in ta in in g .

Whereas McTaggart sa y s, " I f

th e r e s u l t s which I have reached . . . .

a re v a l id , i t would seem

t h a t we have no reaso n to b e lie v e i n th e e x iste n c e o f a g o d ,"58 O rr sa y s, "The co n clu sio n we reach from th e v a rio u s arguments and c o n s id e ra tio n s advanced i n t h i s L ectu re i s , th a t th e C h ris tia n view o f a p e rso n a l and h o ly God, as th e A uthor o f th e u n iv e rs e , and i t s moral L e g is la to r and R u ler, i s th e only one in which reaso n and th e h e a r t of man can perm anently r e s t .

hRQ

I n th e f i f t h ch a p ter

o f Dogmas o f R elig io n McTaggart arg u es f o r determ inism and seeks t o show i t s c o m p a tib ility w ith r e s p o n s i b ilit y and v ir tu e ; "But", O rr conclud es, "reg ard ed in th e l i g h t o f h i s e s s e n tia l m atu re, m an's d ig n ity o o n s is ts in h is power of s e lf-d e te rm in a tio n , and in th e r e g u la tio n of h is l i f e by r a t i o n a l and m oral ends.

In human

freedom, th e r e f o r e , th e r e i s no c o n tra d ic tio n o f th e law o f causa­ tio n , b u t r a th e r th e r a is i n g o f th a t law to i t s own u ltim a te p r in ­ c ip le i n s e lf-c o n s c io u s p e r s o n a l i t y ."60 McTaggart r e j e c t s th e or­ d in a ry arguments f o r im m o rta lity , and w hile he h o ld s t h a t a l l f i n i t e s e lv e s a re e t e r n a l, he does n o t mean p e rso n a l im m o rtality i n th e u s u a l sen se.

O r r 's view i s p r e c is e ly th e o p p o site : "I th in k ,

th e n , we may conclude t h a t reason does c r e a te a presum ption^ and a v ery s tro n g one, in fav o u r o f a f u tu re l i f e .

The co n sid eratio n s-w e

58. Quoted by O rr, I b i d . p . 41. 59. O rr, The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World, p . 132. 60. O rr, David Hume, p . 142.

103

have u rg ed prove th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f im m o rta lity , and show th a t th e soul o f man i s n a tu r a lly f i t t e d f o r im m o rtality .

61. O rr, The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World, pp . 188-9.

CHAPTER VII THE RITSCHLIAN THEOLOGY One o f th e s ig n if ic a n t movements o f th e tim es In which James O rr liv e d was th e development o f th e R its o h lia n theology i n Ger­ many.

A lb rech t R its c h l, (1822-89) th e founder o f th e sc h o o l, was

in flu e n c e d i n tu rn by Baur and th e Tubingen sch o o l, Kant, S d e i e r maoher and L o tze.

R its c h l was p ro fe s s o r o f theo lo g y f i r s t a t Bonn

and l a t e r a t G o ttin g en .

His two c h ie f works a re The O rig in o f the

Old C a th o lic Church (1850) which appeared i n a c o n sid erab ly re v is e d e d itio n in 1857, and The C h ris tia n D o ctrin e o f J u s t i f i c a t i o n and R e c o n c ilia tio n (1870-4) I.

The R its c h lla n Sohool. The p u b lic a tio n o f t h i s la rg e work on th e atonement e s t a b l i s -

ed h is r e p u ta tio n as an ab le and independent th in k e r and a la rg e group o f d is c ip le s a tte n d e d h is c la s s e s a t G o ttin g en .

However,

some o f th e b e s t known r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f th e sch o o l, l i k e Kaftan and Herrmann, were n ev er p u p ils o f R its c h l.

Among th e most p ro ­

m inent a d h e re n ts o f th e R its c h lla n view were men l i k e Herrmann and K aftan i n th eo lo g y , Harnack in Church H isto ry , Wendt in New T esta­ ment th e o lo g y , and S ch u ltz i n Old Testament th eo lo g y . The In flu e n c e o f th e movement spread to Prance th ro u g h S a b a tie r, in to S w itzerlan d through A s tie , and through H o G iffert to America. The th e o lo g ic a l system s o f th e s e and o th e r r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f th e R its c h lla n theology d if f e r e d in many r e s p e c ts .

N e v e rth e le ss,

105

th e re a re c e r ta in common aims and o u tsta n d in g agreem ents which fona a bond of union between them.

The c h ie f common emphases

w i l l be n o te d in th e fo llo w in g p ag e s. I I . The R lte a h llfln Theory o f Knowledge. The governing id e a s o f th e R its c h lla n system a re th e th eo ry t>f knowledge and th e th e o ry o f r e l i g i o n . la id

The members o f th e school

g r e a t s tr e s s on th e th eo ry o f knowledge and made a d is t in c t io n

between r e lig io u s and th e o r e tic knowledge.

T his d is t in c t io n in ­

v olves th e d o c trin e o f value-Judgm ents. The p ro c e ss by which a l l knowledge i s a c q u ire d i s t h a t o f form ing Judgments concerning s e n s a tio n s .

T his p ro cess i s perform ed

i n e i t h e r o f two ways, th e p ro cess f o r form ing r e lig io u s judgments d if f e r i n g from th a t f o r forming th e o r e tlo Judgments.

L. Henry

Schwab makes t h i s d is t in c t io n q u ite c l e a r . I n a l l th e o r e tic judgments th e i n t e l l e c t alo n e o p e ra te s ; in r e lig i o u s Judgments th e f e e lin g s have something to sa y . In th e o r e tic a l Judgments th e mind d e fin e s i t s se n sa tio n s and c l a s s i f i e s them acco rd in g to t h e i r o r ig in , t h e i r c h a ra c te r, and t h e i r co n n ectio n s w ith o th e r o b je c ts ; and th e a c t i v i t y o f th e mind in t h i s p ro c e ss i s a p u re ly i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . . . . Hot so i n r e lig io u s judgm ents. The p ro cess i s not a p u re ly i n t e l l e c t u a l one. The f e e lin g s have t h e i r l e g i t i ­ mate sphere o f in f lu e n c e .! i . . • • whenever a r e lig io u s t r u t h p r e s e n ts I t s e l f to th e mind, th e re goes w ith i t a c e r ta in f e e lin g , e i t h e r o f a t t r a c ­ tio n o r re p u ls io n ; we f e e l th a t th e t r u t h in q u estio n i s e i t h e r h e lp fu l o r h u r tf u l to u s . R its c h l t e l l s u s th e s e f e e l­ in g s a re n o t to be d isc a rd e d , a re n o t to be e lim in a te d , in o rd e r th a t we may a r r iv e a t a d i s i n te r e s t e d , u n b iased Judgment.2 R its c h l h im self sa y s, How i n o rd e r to e l i c i t th e d is t in c t io n between th e two from 1 . A P le a f o r R its c h l, The American Jo u rn a l o f Theology. V ol. V, 1901, p . 58. 2 . I b i d . p . 39.

106

th e realm o f th e a u b je o t, I r e c a l l th e tw ofold manner I n whloh th e mind (G e ist) f u r th e r a p p ro p ria te s th e s e n s a tio n s aroused in it * They a re determ ined, acco rd in g to t h e i r v alu e f o r th e Ego, by th e f e e lin g o f p le a s u re o r p a in . F e e lin g i s th e b a s a l fu n c tio n o f mind, Inasmuch a s i n i t th e Ego i s o r ig in a lly p re s e n t to I t s e l f . In th e f e e lin g o f p le a s u re o r p a in , th e Ego d ecid es w hether a s e n s a tio n , which to u ch es th e f e e lin g of s e l f , serv es to h eig h ten o r d ep ress i t . On th e o th e r hand, through an id e a th e se n sa tio n i s Judged in re s p e c t to i t s cause, th e n a tu re o f th e l a t t e r , and i t s co nnection w ith o th e r cau ses: and by means o f o b se rv a tio n , e t c . , th e know­ led g e o f th in g s th u s g ain ed i s extended u n t i l i t becomes s c i­ e n tif ic .3 I n b r i e f , to re g a rd an o b je c t in i t s r e l a t i o n to and v alu e f o r th e s e l f y ie ld s value-Judgm ents; to re g a rd an o b je c t in i t s n a tu re and o b je c tiv e r e la tio n s y ie ld s th e o r e tic a l Judgm ents.4 I I I . T£ie R its c h lla n Theory fif R e lig io n . An e q u a lly fundam ental p a r t o f th e R its c h lla n system i s i t s th e o ry of r e lig io n which d i f f e r s fundam entally from th e o rd in a ry view .

R e lig io n i s commonly u n d ersto o d to be p rim a rily a bond be­

tween th e so u l and God and to In v o lv e an o r ig in a l and immediate r e l a t i o n o f th e so u l to God.® I n th e R its c h lla n conception th e r e l a t i o n to th e w orld, n o t th e r e l a t i o n to God, i s th e p rim ary fa c to r.

R e lig io n a r i s e s as a means o f so lv in g th e problem s o f

th e w orld and o f m an's r e l a t i o n to i t .

"In a l l r e lig io n th e en­

deavour i s made w ith th e h elp o f th e e x a lte d s p i r i t u a l power which man a d o re s, to so lv e th e c o n tra d ic tio n in which man fin d s h im se lf a s a p a r t o f th e n a tu r a l w orld, and a s a s p i r i t u a l p e r s o n a lity , which makes th e claim to r u le n a t u r e . "6 3 . A lb rech t R its c h l, The C h ris tia n D octrine o f J u s t i f i c a t i o n and R e c o n c ilia tio n . tr a n s l a te d by J . S. B lack, p p . 203-4. Edmonsto n and Douglas, Edinburgh, 1872. 4 . Cf. A l f r e d s . G arv ie, R its c h lia n is m , H astin g h E ncyclopaedia o f R e lig io n and E th ic s . V ol. X, p . 814. 5 . Cf. O rr, The m ta e h lia n Theology and th e E v a n g e lic a l F a i t h , p . 71 6 . Quoted by G arvie, op,, o i t .

107

The g e n e sis of r e lig i o n I s somewhat a f t e r t h i s m anner.7 Man, knowing t h a t he I s a s p i r i t u a l b e in g , r e a l iz e s th a t he I s o f high­ e r w orth th an th e n a tu r a l w orld, y e t he knows to o th a t he I s de­ pendent on th e n a tu r a l w orld, and, p h y s ic a lly , I s a p a r t o f I t . While he ought to r u le n a tu re , y e t he fin d s t h a t n a tu r a l e o n d ltlo n s h in d e r o r p rev en t him from a t ta i n in g h is s p i r i t u a l ends.

Hence th e

problem f o r man i s how to overcome t h i s c o n tr a d ic tio n and f u l f i l l h i s d e s tin y .

He f in d s th e s o lu tio n in th e Id e a of God, a Being

who has c re a te d th e w orld and now governs i t f o r s p i r i t u a l ends. R its c h l a ssu re s u s th a t we must tu rn to C h r is tia n ity to d is ­ cover what r e lig io n In I t s I d e a l form I s . a re tran sc en d e d by C h r is tia n ity , and . . . .

A ll r e lig io n s ". . • . In I t th e tendency o f

a l l o th e rs comes to a p e rfe o t r e s u l t . 1® He d e fin e s i t th u s : C h r is tia n ity , th en i s th e m o n o th e istic , com pletely s p i r i t u a l , and e t h ic a l r e l i g i o n , which, based on th e l i f e o f I t s Author as Redeemer and as Founder o f th e Kingdom of God, c o n s is ts in th e freedom o f th e c h ild re n o f God, in v o lv e s th e im pulse to conduct from th e motive o f lo v e , alms a t th e moral o rg an i­ z a tio n o f mankind, and grounds b le sse d n e ss on th e r e l a t i o n o f sonshlp to God, as w ell a s on th e Kingdom o f God.» XV.

The R its c h lla n Id e a o f th e Kingdom o f God. R its c h l p re s e n ts redem ption through C h ris t and th e kingdom o f

God as th e two f o c i o f th e e l l i p s e o f C h r is t ia n i ty . I n C h r is tia n ity , th e Kingdom of God i s re p re s e n te d a s th e com­ mon end o f God and th e e l e c t community, In such a way t h a t i t r i s e s above th e n a tu r a l l i m i t s o f n a t i o n a l i t y and becomes th e m oral so c ie ty o f th e n a tio n ................. Redemption through C h ris t - an id e a which embraces J u s t i f i c a ­ tio n and renew al - i s a lso dlveB ted o f a l l c o n d itio n s o f a n a tu r a l o r conscious k in d , so as to oulm inate in th e p u rely s p i r i t u a l id e a o f e te r n a l l i f e . 2 . Cf. O rr. I b i d . . p p . 7 2 -3 . 8 . Quoted by A. E. G arv ie, The R its c h lla n Theology, pp. 163-4. 9 . A breoht R its c h l, oj>. c l t . . p . 13.

108

There can be no doubt th a t th e s e two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s condi­ t io n each o th e r m utually* C h ris t made th e u n iv e rs a l m oral Kingdom o f God H is end, and th u s He came to know and decid e f o r th a t k in d o f redem ption which He ach iev ed through th e m aintenance o f f i d e l i t y In His c a llin g and H is b le s s e d fello w ­ sh ip w ith Cod th ro u g h s u f fe rin g unto d e a th . On th e o th e r hand, a c o r r e c t s p i r i t u a l i n te r p r e t a ti o n o f redem ption and J u s t i f i ­ c a tio n through C h ris t te n d s to keep more d e c is iv e ly to th e f r o n t th e t r u t h th a t th e Kingdom I s th e f i n a l end* . . • • C h r is tia n ity , so t o speak, resem bles n o t a c i r c l e de­ s c rib e d from a s in g le c e n te r, b u t an e llp s e which i s determ in­ ed by two f o c i . 10 I t i s ev id en t from t h i s statem en t th a t o f th e two f o c i th e d o c trin e o f redem ption i s su b o rd in ated to th e d o c trin e o f th e king­ dom o f God* The kingdom o f GOd i s a u n iv e rs a l moral union of men and i t s d is tin g u is h in g mark i s r e c ip ro c a l a c tio n from th e m otive o f lo v e . Herrmann d e fin e s th e kingdom of God i n th e se words! "The Kingdom o f God was to Je su s th e so v ereig n ty of God i n th e in n e r l i f e o f p e rso n a l b e in g s, and i n t h e i r communion one w ith th e o th e r .

The

members o f th e Kingdom of God, as J e s u s u n d ersto o d i t , a re th o se men who a re f u lly s u b je c t to God through boundless co n fidence in Him and unbounded lo v e o f t h e i r n e ig h b o r/11 The id e a o f th e kingdom o f God so lv es th e problem o f th e w orld, f o r , I f , a c c o rd in g ly , th e c re a tio n and guidance o f th e w orld a re to be apprehended as th e means f o r th e b u ild in g up o f c r e a t­ ed s p i r i t u a l n a tu re s , v iz . men, in to th e Kingdom o f God i n th e community of" C h r is t, th e n th e r e lig io u s view o f th e world i n C h r is tia n ity i s th e means o f th e s o lu tio n o f th e w orldproblem g e n e ra lly , . . . . t h i s r e lig io n . . . . in c lu d in g w ith in i t s e l f th e u n iv e rs a l d e s tin a tio n o f th e human r a c e .1^ 1 0 . A. R its c h l, p p . c l t . pp. 10-11. 1 1 . Quoted by O rr, op. c l t . p . 207. 1 2 . 8ouree unknown.

109

V.

3&£ R its c h lla n D o ctrin e o f S in

Redemption*

R its c h l d e riv e s h i s d o c trin e o f s in from h is Id ea o f th e kingdom o f God.

Sin I s th e c o n tra d ic tio n o f good.

I n C h ris­

t i a n i t y th e Id ea o f good i s summed up i n th e Id e a o f th e king­ dom o f God which p r e s c rib e s to i t s members t h e i r h ig h e st moral task*

Hence th e id e a o f th e kingdom o f God I s th e sta n d a rd of

Judgment on s in . donable*

Sin i s due to ignorance and i s th e re fo re p ar­

There i s no p re s e n t w rath o f God a g a in s t s in ; i t i s

only a fu tu re p o s s i b i l i t y f o r th o se who oppose them selves to H is kingdom.

As lo n g as s in i s due to ig n o ran c e, th a t i s , as

long a s G od's purpose i s n o t f i n a l l y r e je c te d , God can and does pardon sin* R i t s c h l 's d o c trin e o f redem ption i s c lo s e ly a s s o c ia te d w ith h is d o c trin e of s in .

To fo rg iv e man, God r e s to r e s th e f i l i a l

r e l a t i o n between h im s e lf and man*

There i s n o th in g e i t h e r in

God o r in man to h in d e r fo rg iv en ess*

God's m otive in fo rg iv e n e ss

i s h is purpose to e s ta b li s h th e kingdom*

The in stru m e n t God em­

plo y ed i n im p artin g fo rg iv e n e ss to men was th e work o f C h ris t as th e founder o f th e kingdom o f God*

C h r i s t 's d eath removed th e

s i n n e r '8 d i s t r u s t in God, r e - e s ta b lis h e d h is confidence and brought h i s w ill to a p p ro p ria te God's end.

I n fe llo w sh ip w ith C h r is t, s in ­

n e rs have access to God and a re re c e iv e d in to communion w ith Him* J u s t i f i c a t i o n i s an a c t o f God whereby He g ra c io u s ly re c e iv e s th e s in n e r in to fello w sh ip w ith H im self i n s p ite o f th e c o n tra d ic tio n i n which th e sin n e r sta n d s tow ard Him because o f h is s in and con­ sc io u sn ess o f g u i l t .

" J u s t i f i c a t i o n o r r e c o n c ilia tio n i s th e w ill

o f God as F a th e r to adm it s in n e rs , n o tw ith sta n d in g t h e i r s in s and

110

t h e i r conscio u sn ess o f g u i l t , to th a t fe llo w sh ip w ith H im self which In c lu d e s th e r i g h t o f sonship and e te r n a l l i f e . " 13 V I.

Xfeg R e la tio n o£ James

to th £ R its c h lla n Ik£2l2£Z*

O rr has expressed h is views concerning th e R its c h lla n th e o l­ ogy i n two hooks, Iks, R its c h lla n Theology and th e E v an g e lica l F a ith (1897) and R lta o h lla .n lam (1903), which a re devoted e n t ir e ly to th e s u b je c t.

The su b je c t a ls o re c e iv e s fre q u e n t comment i n The C hris­

t i a n View o f god and th e World. I n th e s e works O rr p o in ts out th e a s p e c ts o f th e R its c h lla n system which he c o n s id e rs In a fa v o ra b le l i g h t and th o se which he c o n s id e rs to be u n a c c e p ta b le .

H is f i r s t book was alm ost th e f i r s t

book on R ltsc h lla n lsm i n th e E n g lish language.

When i t appeared

alm ost none o f works o f th e r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s o f th e school had been tr a n s l a te d In to E n g lish .

Thus Orr served to p o p u la riz e R its c h lia n -

lsm b u t a t th e same tim e he lim ite d I t s in flu e n c e through h is nega­ ti v e c r iti c is m s . A. Orr *8 E stim ate o£ t&& M erits o f C e rta in emphases o f th e R its c h lla n system a re v ery a c c e p ta b le to O rr.

He says:

The elem ents o f v alu e which I reco g n ize i n i t a re I t s fre s h , f u l l in s is te n c e on th e s e lf-e v id e n c in g n a tu re and e x h a u stle ss s p i r i t u a l potency o f th e r e v e la tio n o f Ood in C h ris t; I t s re ­ c o g n itio n o f th e uniqueness o f C h ris t a s th e One In whose P erso n and work g o d 's purpose has come f u l l y to l i g h t , and thro u g h whom i t h as o b ta in ed h i s t o r i c a l r e a l iz a tio n ; th e pro­ minence I t g iv e s to th e g r e a t gospel id e a o f th e kingdom o f god; and, to g e th e r w ith th e s e m e rits , th e p r o te s t I t m ain tain s 1 3 . Q u o te d b y O r r , I b i d . p . 1 5 7 .

Ill

a g a in s t a o n e-sid e d ln te lle o tu a lis m , and I t s co n sta n t r e ­ v e rs io n to th e f a c t o f a p o s itiv e r e v e l a tio n .14 • . . . we r e jo ic e i n th e n o te o f r e tu r n to p o s itiv e Revela­ t io n i n C h ris t sounded by th e sch o o l, and i n th e te n d e n c ie s to a f u l l e r o o n fesslo n h o th o f th e D eity o f C h r is t, and o f H is work o f atonem ent, . • • . 1B I t i s w ell to f in d R its c h l a ffirm in g so em p h atically th e P e r s o n a lity o f Cod, His c re a tio n o f th e w orld, H is w orldpurpose i n i t , and H is p r o v id e n tia l r u le over i t . 16 There a re o th e r a s p e c ts o f th e system which he does n o t a c c e p t, namely, i t s non -m y stio al view o f r e lig i o n , i t s d iv o rce o f f a i t h and re a so n , i t s r e s t r i c t i o n o f r e lig i o u s t r u t h s to value-Judgm ents, i t s view o f d iv in e rig h te o u s n e ss and i t s d o c trin e of r e c o n c ilia ­ t i o n . 1? B.

Q a i ia fiE k tlg la g Q f tfea R i t s o h l l a n XhSSXZ 2 l K now ledge.

O rr acknowledges t h a t th e re i s an a s p e c t o f tr u t h in th e d is ­ t i n c t i o n between r e lig i o u s and th e o r e tic knowledge and i n th e doc­ t r i n e o f v alu e-Ju d g in g , b u t he d is s e n ts a b s o lu te ly from th e way R itsc h lia n is m d iv o rc e s f a i t h and re a so n . adm it, e n te r s deeply in to r e lig io n ; b u t •

■ 'V a lu e -Ju d g in g ', we • • i t a f f o rd s no

w arrant f o r th e dualism which R its c h l would s e t up between 'Judg­ ments o f v a lu e ' and 't h e o r e t i c ' knowledge; o r f o r th e sta tem en t th a t r e lig i o u s knowledge c o n s is ts only i n 'Judgm ents o f value'.*1® There i s no c o n tr a r ie ty between Judgments o f v alu e and Judgments o f e x is te n c e and no antagonism between a Judgment o f v a lu e and a s c i e n t i f i c Judgment a p p lie d to th e same o b je c t, O rr i n s i s t s . 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

O rr, R its c h lia n is m . p . 30. O rr, The R itsc h lla n , Theology and th e E v an g e lica l F a i t h , p . 234. I b i d . p . 254. Of. O rr, R itso h U an iem . u p - 29-30. O rr, R its o h lla n Theology ggd thg. E v a n g e lic a l Es2J&» p . 245.

112

M oreover, Judgments o f v alu e do n o t exhaust o u r whole knowledge i n r e lig i o u s m a tte rs and a re n o t in co m p atib le w ith tr u e th e o r e tic Judgments reg ard in g them .19 C.

O rr1s C ritic is m o£ th £ R its o h lla n Theory o£ R g llg jo n .

O r r 's c r itic is m o f th e R its c h lla n th eo ry o f r e lig io n i s th a t i t i s a m istake to deny th a t r e lig io n i s an immediate bond between th e so u l and God.

M oreover, to say th a t r e lig i o n a r is e s n o t a s a

prim ary r e la tio n o f th e so u l to Gk>d, b u t as a means o f so lv in g th e problem o f man's r e l a t i o n to th e w orld i s to in v e r t th e tr u e id e a . o.

f i a l g . firtrfrlQAiM o £ Ik s. R j t s g h i i a a t a s a

&LS. glng&Pffl

of

Although th e R its c h lla n theology has perform ed a s e rv ic e in em phasizing th e co n cep tio n o f th e kingdom o f God, Orr i s o f th e o p in io n t h a t i t has f a i l e d to p u t in to i t th e meaning o f th e p r i ­ m itiv e G ospel.

Moreover, th e id e a th a t men a re to a c t re c ip ro ­

c a lly i n t h e i r r e la tio n s to each o th e r from th e motive o f lo v e i s in a d e q u a te .

To say th a t each i s to adopt th e end o f th e

o th e rs a s h is own i s to move in a c i r c l e . E.

Q r r 's C ritic is m o f th e R its c h lla n D octrine Q l SXR Redemption.

O rr a ls o fin d s t h a t th e R its c h lla n co nception of s in and s a l­ v a tio n i s in ad eq u ate; i t does n o t measure up to th e sta n d a rd of th e e v a n g e lic a l f a i t h o r o f th e A p o sto lic G ospel.

In th e evan­

g e l i c a l f a i t h , to which O rr su b sc rib e s, th e d e a th of C h ris t l a 19. Cf. I b i d . C hapter V III f o r a g e n e ra l c r iti c is m o f th e R its o h lla n view .

113

reg ard ed a s a s a c r i f i c e f o r s in s - a " p r o p itia tio n f o r th e s in s o f th e whole w o rld ."

I n th e R its c h lla n th eo lo g y th e re i s no

d o c trin e o f p r o p i t i a t i o n .

The d ea th o f C h ris t i s in te r p r e t e d as

a p ro o f o f H is f i d e l i t y in H is c a llin g and a w arran t f o r c o n fi­ dence i n approaching Cod. I n th e R its c h lla n theology Cod i s p u re ly and s o le ly lo v e ; th e re i s no re c o g n itio n o f th e h o lin e s s which abhors and th e J u s tic e which must n e c e s s a r ily p u n ish s in .

"In t h i s d e n ia l o f

th e p u n itiv e J u s tic e o f God, R itsc h lia n ism f a l l s below th e B ib li­ c a l s ta n d a rd , and l e t s drop elem ents o f in d is p e n sa b le v a lu e in a moral view o f th e u n iv e rs e .

Te can n o t, • • • • expel 'la w 1 from

th e bosom o f Cod, any more th an from th e co n scien ce o f man; and w hile i t rem ains, th e C h ris tia n d o c trin e of th e atonement w ill have an a b id in g n e c e s s ity and w o rth ."20 A nother o f O r r 's c r itic is m s o f th e R its c h lla n system i s th a t in i t s in lo s e s th e c a ta s tro p h ic c h a ra c te r w ith which th e B ib le In v e s ts i t ; i t app ears In s te a d a s a n a tu r a l development; because i t i s due to ig n o ran ce i t i s r e a d ily p ard o n ab le.

However, to th e

e v a n g e lic a l f a i t h , s in and g u i l t a re t e r r i b l e r e a l i t i e s , which c a l l f o r th th e Judgment o f Cod upon them.

The condemnation which

r e s t s upon th e ra c e must be l i f t e d o f f a s a f i r s t c o n d itio n o f s a lv a tio n .

"R itsc h lia n ism and th e e v a n g e lic a l theology h e re , ac­

co rd in g ly , d e c is iv e ly d iv id e p a th s , and we have no h e s ita t io n in saying t h a t th e l a t t e r i s n o t o nly t r u e r to co n scien ce, b u t plumbs depths i n th e sense o f s in , and m eets wants i n th e human co n scien ce; 20. Ib id . p .

266.

114

which th e form er f a l l s to to u ch . "Si­ l t i s obvious t h a t although O rr a p p re c ia te s c e r ta in o f th e emphases o f th e R its c h lla n th eo lo g y , when measured by th e stan d ­ a rd o f th e e v a n g e lic a l theology i t s fundam ental p r in c ip le s a re found to be inadequate*

21. Ib id . p .

267.

CHAPTER V III BIBLICAL CRITICISM A nother in flu e n c e which p lay ed a prom inent p a r t in shaping th e thought o f th e n in e te e n th c e n tu ry , e s p e c ia lly th e o lo g ic a l th in k in g , was B lb lio a l c r iti c is m .

As th e n e o - id e a lis t philosophy

a ro se from German so u rc e s, and a s th e R its c h lla n theology was es­ s e n t i a l l y Carman in o r ig in ; and development* so to o , B lb lio a l c r i t i ­ cism was p rim a rily a German movement.

I . ThS. QlflKln 2 l

figLtislSS*

B i b lic a l c r itic is m i s p a r t o f a much l a r g e r movement.

I t is

th e a p p lic a tio n o f th e g en e ra l method o f h i s t o r i c a l In q u iry , to th e B ib le .

The method aro se i n Germany and from th e re sp read to

England and S co tla n d .

I t o r ig in a te d in th e e ig h te e n th cen tu ry and

d u rin g th e n in e te e n th cen tu ry became a pow erful in stru m en t o f c r i ­ t i c a l re s e a rc h . V. 7 . S to r r sa y s, "We must lo o k to L essin g and Herder prim ar­ i l y , . • • », as th e c r e a to r s o f th e h i s t o r i c a l m e t h o d . H e r d e r was th e r e a l p io n e e r i n th e f i e l d . He conceived th e id e a t h a t l i t e r a t u r e and a r t , to g e th e r w ith language and n a tio n a l c u ltu re a s a whole, a r e evolved by a n a tu r a l p ro c e s s, and t h a t th e I n t e l l e c t u a l and em otional l i f e o f each people i s c o r r e la te d w ith p e c u l i a r i t i e s o f p h y s ic a l temperament and o f m a te ria l environm ent. I n t h i s way he be­ came th e o r ig in a to r o f t h a t g e n e tic o r h i s t o r i c a l method which 1 . The Development o f E n g lish Theology i n th e N in eteen th C entury. p . 160.

116

has sin c e "been a p p lie d to a l l human Id e a s and I n s t i t u t i o n s . • • • • T his h i s t o r i c a l Id e a was c a r r ie d by H erder I n to th e reg io n s o f p o e try , a r t , r e lig i o n , language, and f i n a l l y In to human c u ltu r e as a w hole.2 The a p p lic a tio n o f th e h i s t o r i c a l method to th e B ib le c re a te d th e sc ien c e o f B ib lic a l c r itic is m . II.

D e fin itio n s B ib lic a l c r iti c is m I s u s u a lly co n sid ered to have two main d i­

v is io n s - low er o r te x tu a l c r iti c is m and h ig h e r c r iti c is m ,

^ lo w ­

e r c ritic is m * d e a ls s t r i c t l y w ith th e t e x t o f S c rip tu re , endeavor­ in g to a s o e r ta ln what th e r e a l t e x t o f each book was a s i t came from th e hands o f th e au th o r; 'h ig h e r c ritic is m * concerns i t s e l f w ith th e r e s u lt a n t problem s o f ag e, a u th o rsh ip , so u rce s, sim ple o r com posite c h a ra c te r, h i s t o r i c a l w orth, r e l a t i o n to p e rio d o f o r ig in , e tc .* 3 A f u r th e r d is t in c t io n I s u s u a lly made between two b ranches of h ig h e r c r itic is m - l i t e r a r y c r itic is m and h i s t o r i c a l c r i t i c i s m . One branch seeks to determ ine th e scope, purpose and c h a ra c te r o f th e v a rio u s books o f th e Old T estam ent, th e tim es i n and c o n d itio n s u n d er which they were w r itte n , whether th e y were s e v e r a lly th e work of a s in g le a u th o r o r o f s e v e ra l, w hether they embody e a r l i e r souroes and, I f so , th e c h a ra c te r o f th e s e , and th e c o n d itio n s under which th ey have reached u s , w hether a l t e r e d and, i f a l te r e d , how; t h i s i s L ite r a r y C r itic is m . A f u r th e r ta s k I s to e stim a te th e v alu e o f t h i s l i t e r a t u r e as evidence f o r th e h is to r y of I s r a e l , t o determ ine, a s f a r as p o s s ib le , w hether such p a r ts o f th e l i t e r a t u r e as a re contem­ p o ra ry w ith th e tim e d e s c rib e d p re s e n t c o r r e c t, o r w hether in any re s p e c t o n e-sid e d or b ia s e d o r o th erw ise I n c o r r e c t, de­ s c r ip tio n s ; and a g a in , how f a r th e l i t e r a t u r e th a t r e l a t e s th e s to ry of long p a s t p erio d s has drawn from tru stw o rth y reco rd d , and how f a r I t i s p o s s ib le to e x tr a c t h i s t o r i c a l t r u t h from tr a d i t i o n s • • • • ; a l l t h i s f a l l s under H is to r ic a l C ritic is m . 2 . James S u lly , H erder, Encyclopaedia B rlta n n lo a . 1 1 th E d itio n , V ol. 13, p . 348. 3 . James O rr, C ritic is m o f th e B ib le , I n te r n a tio n a l S tandard B ib le ^ c y c lo p a e d ia . 1 s t . E d itio n , V ol. I I , p . 749.

117

w hich, on I t s c o n s tru c tiv e s id e , must a v a il I t s e l f o f a l l a v a ila b le and w e ll - s l f te d evidence, w hether d eriv e d from th e Old Testament o r elsew here, f o r th e p r e s e n ta tio n o f th e h is ­ to r y o f I s r a e l - I t s u ltim a te p u rp o se .4 III.

Modern fllfi Testam ent g£U&g.lgff.» The r i s e o f modem Old Testament c r iti c is m I s lin k e d w ith th e

name o f an In tim a te f r ie n d o f H erder, J . G. E ichhorn. A.

Johann G o ttf rie d SlQ.hfr.Qril-

G. B. Gray t e l l s u s th a t Johann G o ttf rie d Eichhorn (1752-1827) has " . • • • n o t w ith o u t reaso n , been termed th e 'fo u n d e r o f modem Old Testam ent c r i t i c i s m ' . " 5 cism ".

To him we owe th e p h rase “h ig h e r c r l t i -

The p u b lic a tio n o f h is E ln le ltu n g (I n tro d u c tio n to th e Old

T estam ent) i n th re e volumes i n 1780-83 c o n s titu te s a la n d mark i n th e h is to r y o f Old Testament c r iti c is m f o r i t i s th e f i r s t compre­ hensive tre a tm e n t o f th e e n t ir e Old Testament as l i t e r a t u r e .

a. •

. • i n th e In tro d u c tio n . " says Gray "th e re emerge most o f th e broad c o n c lu sio n s o f l i t e r a r y c r iti c is m (sometimes Incom plete) which, a f t e r more than a cen tu ry o f keen exam ination by sc h o la rs u n w illin g to adm it them, have p assed by more o r l e s s g e n e ra l consent in to th e number o f h i s t o r i c a l c e r t a i n t i e s o r h ig h e r p r o b a b i l i t i e s . " 6 B.

DtlhfrMn M artin L eberecht £& W ette-

The work o f V ilhelm M artin L eberecht De Wette (1780-1849) marks th e n ex t d i s t i n c t stag e in th e h is to r y o f h ig h e r c r iti c is m . L ike Eichhorn he was In flu e n c e d by H erder.

He i s d is tin g u is h e d

4 . G. B. Gray, B ib le , Encyclopaedia B rlta n n lc a . 1 1 th E d itio n , V ol. H I , pp. 857-8* p.. 862. 6. Loo, c l t .

118

f o r h is c o n trib u tio n s to h i s t o r i c a l c r itic is m .

In h is two-volume

B e itra e e zur e ln le ltu n g in das A lte Testament (1806-7), "He c a r­ r ie d c r iti c is m beyond l i t e r a r y a n a ly s is and l i t e r a r y a p p re c ia tio n to th e ta s k o f d eterm in in g th e w orth o f th e documents as re c o rd s, th e v a l i d i t y o f th e ev id e n c e ."’'’ The in tro d u c tio n to th e second volume g iv es a c a r e f u l a n a ly s is o f th e p r in c ip le s o f sound h is ­ t o r i c a l method and th e e s s e n tia ls o f a tru stw o rth y h i s t o r i c a l re ­ cord.

J u li u s W ellhausen d e sc rib e d De Wette as th e " . . . . epoch-

making opener of th e h i s t o r i c a l c r itic is m o f th e P entateuch."® 0.

George H ein rich August Von Ewald.

George H ein rich August Von Ewald (1803-75) su p p lied an element which De Wette la c k e d .

De W ette, though s tro n g in h i s t o r i c a l c r i ­

tic is m , was weak in h i s t o r i c a l c o n s tru c tio n .

Ewald1s H isto ry of

th e People o f I s r a e l (1843-59) was th e f i r s t attem p t a t h i s t o r i c a l c o n s tru c tio n .

In i t he endeavored to sy n th e siz e th e r e s u l t s o f

c r iti c is m and give them a p o s itiv e c o n s tru c tio n by p re s e n tin g the h is to r y o f I s r a e l as a g re a t r e a l i t y o f th e p a s t. D.

Johann K arl Wilhelm V atk e.

The most re v o lu tio n a ry ste p i n th e development o f h ig h e r c r i ­ tic is m was in tro d u ce d by Johann K arl Wilhelm Vatke (1806-82). 1835 h is B ib lic a l Theology appeared.

In

I t a p p lie d H e rd e r's concep­

tio n o f th e development o f h is to r y , to g e th e r w ith H e g e l's p h ilo s o ­ phy o f h is to r y , to th e r e lig io n of I s r a e l .

"He a ffirm s th a t th e

7 . Loo, c l t . 8 . A r tic le W. L. IS. De W ette, E ncyclopaedia B r lta n n lc a . 1 1 th E d itio n , V ol. V III, p . 138.

119

law o f development from low er to h ig h e r, which c h a r a c te r iz e s th e growth o f o th e r n a tio n s , I s tr u e o f I s r a e l . " 9

H is c r ltio is m o f

th e n a tio n a l t r a d i t i o n s o f I s r a e l s t a t e s t h a t many t r a d i t i o n s which r e l a t e to th e e a r l i e s t p e rio d o f th e n a t i o n 's l i f e a re r e a l l y of l a t e o rig in *

H is p o s itio n c a lle d f o r a com plete r e v i­

sio n o f th e t r a d i t i o n a l view o f th e o rd er o f I s r a e l 's r e lig io u s and p o l i t i c a l development and c o n sid erab ly m odified th e p r e v a il­ in g views among h ig h e r c r i t i c s .

He sa id t h a t th e p ro p h e tic e le ­

ment and no t th e cerem onial was th e e s s e n tia l element in th e r e ­ lig i o n o f I s r a e l .

I n l i t e r a r y c r iti c is m h is fundam ental th e s is

had been a n tic ip a te d i n a measure by Reuss.

He contended th a t

th e ch ro n o lo g ic al o rd e r o f th e th r e e main so u rces of th e Hexateuch was, f i r s t , th e p ro p h e tic n a r r a tiv e s , n e x t, Deuteronomy, and th en , th e p r i e s t l y code* E-

K arl H ein rich G ra f.

C onsiderable tim e p assed b e fo re V a tk e 's view re c e iv e d any n o ta b le ac cep tan ce.

When i t d id re c e iv e c o n s id e ra tio n alm ost a

g e n e ra tio n l a t e r i t was due to th e work of G raf, W ellhausen and Keunen.

K arl H ein rich G raf (1815-69) In h is H is to r ic a l Books of

th& Old Testament (1866) ". . . • propounded th e view, which he owed to R euss, th a t th e l e g i s l a t i o n o f th e m iddle books o f th e P en ta teu c h (th e L e v lt ic a l law) was n o t e a r l i e r , b u t l a t e r , than Deuteronomy - was, in f a c t , a p ro d u ct of th e age of th e e x i l e . "1°

9 . V. P . 8t o r r , The Development o f E n g lish Theology i n th e Nine­ te e n th Century, p , 169. 10. O rr, The Problem o f th e Old T estam ent, p . 200.

120

F.

Atvnaham Keunen.

The Dutch sc h o la r Abraham Keunen (1828-1891) took th e n ex t ste p and argued th a t h is to r y and law s must go to g e th e r, and th a t I f th e p r i e s t l y law s were l a t e , th e h i s t o r i c a l se o tlo n s must a lso be la te *

G raf came to agree w ith Keunen i n th is *

&. to U us ffeiJjiausaa. T his view re c e iv e d i t s g r e a te s t im petus from J u liu s W ellhausen (1844-1918).

O rr say s, "At f i r s t th e th e o ry was sco u ted ,

b u t g ra d u a lly , through th e ab le'ad v o cacy o f Keunen and W ellhausen - e s p e c ia lly th e l a t t e r - i t secu red ascendency, and i s now r e ­ garded a s th e c r i t i c a l view p a r e x c e lle n c e * C e rta in elem ents o f th e G raf-W ellhausen h y p o th e sis were g e n e ra lly co n sid ered to be s e t t l e d r e s u l t s .

O rr g iv e s a summary

o f th e s e in th e words o f Peake. As a g en e ra l summary o f th e r e s u l t s of th e movement, which i t i s thought 't h e fu tu re i s n o t l i k e l y to r e v e r s e ', th e f o l­ low ing may be quoted from P ro fe s s o r A. S. Peake: 'The an aly ­ s i s o f th e P en ta teu c h in to fo u r main documents, th e i d e n t i ­ f i c a t i o n o f th e law on which J o s i a h 's refo rm a tio n was based w ith some form o f th e Deuteronomio Code, th e co m p ilatio n of t h a t code in th e re ig n o f Hanasseh a t th e e a r l i e s t , th e f i x ­ in g o f th e P r i e s t l y Code to a d a te l a t e r th a n E zekiel* th e h ig h ly com posite c h a ra c te r o f some p a r ts o f th e p ro p h e tic l i t e r a t u r e , e s p e c ia lly th e Book o f I s a ia h , th e p o s t - e x i l i c o r ig in o f most o f th e Psalm s, and la rg e p a r t s o f th e Book o f P ro v erb s, th e com position o f Job n o t e a r l i e r th an th e e x ile and p robably l a t e r , th e Maceabean d a te o f D an ie l, and th e s l i g h t l y e a r l i e r d ate o f E c c le s ia s te s .12 IV . The R e la tio n of Orr to Modern Old Testam ent C r itic is m . O rr was a o tiv e ly engaged i n th e d is c u s s io n o f th e problem s o f Old Testam ent c r i t i c i s m .

He was f u l l y aware o f th e tre n d s o f

11. O rr, C ritic is m o f th e B ib le , I n te r n a tio n a l S tandard B ib le E ncyclopaedia, 1s t E d itio n , V o l. 2 , p . 751. 12. O rr, 0£ . c l t . . p . 752.

121

h is tim e s .

However, h is a t t i t u d e tow ard th e movement was, on

th e whole, one o f disagreem ent r a th e r than agreem ent.

He re p re ­

se n ts th e co n se rv a tiv e p o in t o f view , r a th e r than th e l i t e r a l . O r r 's views a re s t a t e d I n d e t a i l in The Problem o£ th e Old Testament (1905) which Peake says i s *. • • • th e b e s t conserva­ tiv e s t a t e m e n t . S i m i l a r views a re expressed In a p o p u la r manner in The B ib le Under T r ia l (1907).

His views a re summarized

I n th e a r t i c l e " C ritic is m o f th e B ib le" in The I n te r n a tio n a l S tandard B ib le E ncyclopaedia. A.

O rr1s View o f th e E ff e c ts o f S M Testament g rltj,c ljffl

O rr was c h ie f ly concerned w ith th e e f f e c t s o f Old Testament c r itic is m on th e su p e rn a tu ra l elem ent in th e Old Testam ent account o f I s r a e l 's h is to r y , r e lig io n and l i t e r a t u r e .

He say s:

The re v o lu tio n wrought by th e s e newer c o n s tru c tio n s , however, I s n o t ad eq u ately r e a liz e d t i l l reg ard i s had to t h e i r e f f e c ts on th e P ic tu r e g iv en In th e Old Testament I t s e l f o f I s r a e l 's h is t o r y , r e lig io n and l i t e r a t u r e . I t I s n o t too much to say th a t t h i s p ic tu r e i s n e a rly com pletely su b v erted . By th e le a d e r s o f th e school (G raf, Keunen, V ellhausen, Duhm, Stade e t c .) th e s u p e rn a tu ra l elem ent In the h is to r y and r e l i g i o n i s t o t a l l y e lim in a te d ; even by th o se who do n o t go so f a r , l i t t l e i s l e f t sta n d in g . The h is to r y o f th e P en ta teu c h - in d eed th e h is to r y down to th e tim e o f th e k in g s - i s la r g e ly g iven up. G enesis i s le g en d , Exodus h a rd ly more tru stw o rth y , Jo sh u a a romance. The h i s t o r i e s o f Samuel and David are 'w r it te n up' by a th e o c r a tic n a r r a to r . None o f th e . laws - even th e de­ calogue - a re allow ed to be c e r ta in ly M osaic. Monotheism i s b e lie v e d to have come in w ith Amos and Hosea; e a r l i e r Jeho­ vah was ' t r i b a l ' God. Ark, ta b e rn a c le , p rie s th o o d , f e a s t s , as d e p ic te d i n th e P r i e s t l y Code, are p o s t - e x l l l c f i c t i o n . The tre a tm e n t accorded to th e P en tateu ch n e c e s s a r ily r e a c ts on th e o th e r h i s t o r i c a l books; th e p ro p h e tic l i t e r a t u r e s u f f e r s In an alm ost equal degree through d is in te g r a tio n and m u tila tio n . . . • • Pew, i f any o f th e Psalm s a re allow ed to be p r e e x i l i c . 14 13. A r tic le B ib le , E ncyclopaedia B rlta n n lo a . 1 4 th E d itio n , V ol. 3, p . 510. 14. James O rr, oj>. c l t .

122

B.

QrrJ.g E v alu atio n o f Qld ffQBtgmqnt The V irg in B irth o f C h r is t. n er ' s Sons, 1907.

B ib li­

New York: C harles S crib­

__________ , V o lta ir e 's B oast in th e L ig h t o f P re s e n t F a c ts , H om iletic Review. XLVII (March 1904), pp. 185-8. . Wendt on th e S e lf-w itn e ss o f J e s u s . V (O ctober 1893), pp. 23-8.

E x p o sito ry Times.

________ , What H isto ry Owes to J e su s C h r is t. XLVI (November 1903), pp. 344-50.

H om lletlo Review.

__________ , and o th e rs , The W o rld s Rest Day. Edinburgh: Andrew E l l i o t , 1909. "The R e lig io u s B asis o f th e Sabbath H is to r ic a lly C onsidered," C hapter V II, pp . 123-34. B. Reviews and C ritic is m s o f th e Works o f James O rr. Reviews and c r itic is m s a re l i s t e d In a lp h a b e tic a l o rd er according to th e t i t l e of th e books review ed. 1.

Reviews of The B ib le Under T r i a l s

B ib lic a l World. I l l (June 1908), pp. 475-7.

By B. W. B a tte n .

E xpository Times. XVIII, p . 517. H om iletic Review. LIV, pp. 328-31. I n t e r o r e t a r . IV, pp. 255-258. P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Review. VI (A p ril 1908), pp. 296-7. W illiam B. Greene, J r . 2.

By

Reviews o f The C h ris tia n View o f God and th e World.

B ib llo th e o a S acra. LV (Ju ly 1898), p . 577. E x p o sito ry Times. IV, p . 374;

V, p . 518.

In d ep en d e n t. XLVI, (September 13, 1894), p . 1191} 27, 1898), p . 1198. 3.

L (O ctober

Reviews o f David Hume.

American J o u rn a l o f Theology. V III (A p ril 1904), p . 403. A rthur 0. Lovejoy.

By

E x p o sito ry Times. XIV (June 1903), p . 417. P re s b y te ria n Q u a rte rly . XVII (A p ril 1904), pp. 598-9. R. B e a ttie . P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Review. B. B. W arfield .

By F ra n cis

I (O ctober 1903), pp. 636-7.

By

281

4.

Reviews o f The E arly Church:

H isto ry and L i t e r a t u r e .

American Jo u rn a l o f Theology. VI (A p ril 1902), p . 394. E rl B. H u lh ert.

By

P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Review. (A p ril 1915), p . 299. 5.

Reviews of The F a ith o f & Modern C h r is tia n .

Church Q u arterly Review. LXXII (A p ril 1911), pp . 186-9. E xpository Times. XXII (November 1910), p . 8 6 . H om iletic Review. LXI (March 1911), pp. 251-2. Review o f Theology and P h ilo so p h y . VI, pp. 616-618. 6.

Reviews of G od^ Image In Man.

B ib lic a l World. XXVIII (September 1906), p . 220.

By George Cross.

E xpository Times. XVII, p . 146. In d ep en d en t. LXI (O ctober 4, 1906), pp. 823-4. O utlook. LXXXI (December 16, 1905), p . 940. S p e c ta to r. XCV (December 9, 1905), p . 986. 7.

Reviews of I n te r n a tio n a l Standard B ib le E ncyclopaedia.

P rin c e to n T h eological Review. (A p ril 1907), pp. 328-39. Oscar Boyd. 8.

By

Reviews of N eglected F acto rs In th$ Study o f the E arly P rp srsg ? Q l C h r is t ia n i ty .

American Jo u rn a l o f Theology. XIV (January 1910), pp. 188-190* B lb llo th e c a S acra. LVII (A p ril 1900), p . 398.

By Benjamin 0. True.

E xpository Times. X, p . 274; xxv, p . 124. 9.

Reviews of The Problem o f th e Old T estam ent.

American Jo u rn a l o f Theology. X (O ctober 1906), p . 705. B ib lic a l World. XXVII, (May 1906), p . 399.

282

B lb llo th e c a S acra. LX III (A p ril 1906), pp. 374-5. Contemporary Review. XCI (19Q7), pp- 498-9. By A rthur S. Peake. D ia l. XLI (Ju ly 16, 1906), p . 41. E x p o sito ry Times. XVII, p . 320; XIX, p . 63. E x p o s ito r. S e rie s 7, I I (Ju ly 1906), pp. 18-19. M a rg o lio u th ..

By D. S.

H om iletic Review. LIV (November 1907), pp. 328-31. I n t e r p r e t e r . IV (O ctober 1907 - J u ly 1908), pp. 256 F. Peake.

By A. S.

In d ep en d en t. LX (March 10, 1906), p . 571. LX (June 21, 1906), pp. 1490-1. LXI (November 15, 1906), p . 1166. London Times. 5:130 (A p ril 12, 1906). O utlook. LXXXII (March 10, 1906), p . 570. P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Review. V (A p ril 1907), pp. 303-9. D avis.

By J . D.

Review o f Reviews. XXXIII (A p ril 1906), p . 510. Review o f Theology and P h ilo so p h y . I I , pp.

152-160. By W. E. Addis.

S p e c ta to r. XCVI (February 24, 1906), p . 305. 10.

Reviews of th e P ro g ress o f Dogma.

American J o u rn a l o f Theology, VII (January 1903), pp. 177-9. Henry C. Vedder.

By

Athenaeum. I (June 14, 1902), p . 750. E xpository Times. X III (February 1902), pp. 210-1. In d ep en d en t. LIV (August 21, 1902), p . 2026. P re s b y te ria n and Reformed Review. X III (1902), pp. 486-491. B. B. W arfield . 11.

Reviews of The R e ssu rec tio n of J e s u s .

Church Q u arterly Review. LXIX (O ctober 1909), pp. 198-9. E xpository Times. XX (November 1908), pp. 85-6. S p e c ta to r. Cl (O ctober 10, 1908), p . 550.

By

283

12« Revlews o£ R e v ela tio n and I n s p i r a t i o n . Merfl-can J o u rn a l o f Theology. XIV (Ju ly 1910), p . 484. Q-erald B. Smith. B ib lic a l g o rid . XXXVI (Ju ly 1910), pp. 69-70. G ranberry.

By

By John 0.

E x p o sito ry Times. XXI (May 1910), p . 373. H om iletic Review. LX (August 1910), p . 167. In d ep en d en t. LXVTII (A p ril 28, 1910), p . 929. Hew York Times. 15:246 (A p ril 30, 1910).

By. E. S. Brown.

P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Review. (January 1911), pp. 118-123. W illiam B. Greene. T h in k er. 13.

By

VI, p . 36.

Revlews o f R lts c h lla n ls m .

Athenaeum., I (February 6, 1904), pp. 167-8. E x p o sito ry Times. XIV (Ju ly 1903), p . 452. In d ep en d en t. LVI (February 4, 1904), pp. 272-3. P rin c e to n T h eo lo g ical Review. (O ctober 1904), pp. 697-702. By. 0. W. Hodge. 14.

Rsvj-ffws £ f XhS. R ltc h lia n Theology.

American J o u rn a l o f Theology. I l l (A p ril 1899), pp. 401-2. George B. F o s te r. B lb llo th e c a S acra. LV (A p ril 1898), pp. 372-4.

By D. W. Simon.

E x p o sito ry Times. IX (March 1898), p . 268. In d ep en d en t. L (February 24, 1898), p . 254. P re s b y te ria n Q u a rte rly . (1898), pp. 453-6. 15.

Reviews o f S id e lig h ts on C h r is tia n D o c trin e .

E x p o sito ry Times, XX (June 1909), p . 420.

By

284

16.

Revlewg o f 31n as & Problem To-Day.

B lb llo th e c a S acra. LXVIII (A p ril 1911), pp. 352-3. Church Q u arterly Review. LXXII (Ju ly 1911), pp. 457-8. E x p o sito ry Times. XXII (February 1911), p . 223. Review o f Theology and P h ilo so p h y . VI (Ju ly 1910 - June 1911) pp. 681-7. By W illiam J . F e r r a r . 17. Reviews o f The V irg in B irth o f C h r is t. American Jo u rn a l o f Theology. XII (A p ril 1908), pp. 288-9. A llen Hoben.

By

B ib le S tudent and T each er. New S e r ie s , VI, pp . 458-61. B ib lic a l World. XXX (December 1907), p . 480. E xpository Times. XIX (January 1908), p . 172. H om iletic Review. LIV. (December 1907), p . 482. In d ep en d en t. LXTII (November 14, 1907), pp. 1174-5. N atio n . LXXXV (November 14, 1907), p . 449. P rin c e to n T h eological Review. (J u ly 1908), pp. 505-8. Oresham Machen. II.

By J .

Secondary S ources.

B rubacher, John 8 ., Modern P h ilo so p h ie s o f E d u catio n . Me Graw - H ill Book Company, I n c . 1939. E ncyclopaedia B rlta n n lo a . 1 1th and 1 4th E d itio n s . E ncyclopaedia B rita n n ic a , I n c .

New Yorks

New York:

E ncyclopaedia of R e lig io n §£& E th ic s . (James H astin g s, E d ito r ) . New York: C harles S c r ib n e r 's S o n s ,.1925. G arvle, A. E ., The R lto h lia n Theology. C lark , 1899.

Edinburgh: T. and T.

Home, H. H ., The D em ocratic Philosophy o f E d u catio n . The Macmillan Company, 1933.

New York:

-________ , This New E d u catio n . New York: The Abingdom P r e s s , 1931. Metz, R u ld o lf, £ Hundred Y ears o f B r i t i s h P h ilo so p h y . London: George A llen and Unwin L td ., 1938. T ra n s la te d by J . N. Harvey, T. E. Je sso p , and Henry S tu r t.

285

P e rry , Ralph B arton, P hilosophy o f th e Recent P a s t. New York: C harles S c r ib n e r 's Sons, 1926. ( P r a c tic a lly i d e n tic a l w ith P e r r y 's supplement to W eber's H isto ry o f P hilosophy) . R lts c h l, A lbrecht,. C h ris tia n D o ctrin e o f J u s t i f i c a t i o n and Re­ c o n c ili a tio n . Edinburgh: Edmonston and D ouglas, 1872. Trans­ la t e d by J . S. B lack. R ogers, A rth u r K ., E n g lish and American Philosophy 8ince 1800. New York: The M acm illian Company, 1929. Seth, Jam es, E n g llsh P h ilo so p h ers and Schools o f P h ilo so p h y . London: J . M. Dent and Sons, L td ., 1912. S o rley , W illiam R ., 4 . H isto ry o f E n g lish P h ilo so p h y . G. P. Putnam 's Sons, 1921.

New York:

S to rr , Vernon F . , The Development o f E n g llsh Theology In the N in eteen th C entury. 1800 - 1860. London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1913. Swing, A. T ., The Theology o f A lb rech t R l ts c h l. Longmans, Green and Company.

New York:

Webb, Clement C. J . , 4 Study o f R e lig io u s Thought In England from 1850. Oxford: The Clarendon P re s s , 1933. Weber, A. and P e rry , R. B ., H isto ry o f P hilosophy (Weber) ‘tr a n s ­ l a t e d by T h illy and Philosophy Since 1860 ( P e rr y ) . New York: C harles S c r ib n e r 's Sons, 1925. III.

B io g rap h ical S ources.

Denny, Jam es, The L ate P ro fe ss o r O rr. 11, 1913.

B r i t i s h Weekly. September

Fleming, J . R ., 4 H isto ry o f th e Church o f S c o tla n d . 1875-1929. Edinburgh: T. and T. C lark, 1933. __________ , The S to ry o f Church Union In S c o tla n d . 1560-1929. London: James C larke and Company, 1929. Henderson, H. F ., The R e lig io u s C o n tro v ersies o f S co tla n d . burgh: T. and T. C lark , 1905.

Edin­

London Times, ( o b itu a r y ) , Monday, September 8 , 1913. New York Times, (o b itu a r y ) , Monday, September 8, 1913. N lc o ll, W. R obertson, The L ate P ro fe s s o r O rr. September 11, 1913.

The B r i t i s h Weekly.

286

R e ith , George M., Rem iniscences o f th e U nited Free Church G eneral Assembly. (1900-1929) . Edinburgh: The Moray P re s s , n .d . S c o tt, S tew art R ., E ast Bank Church. Hawick: I t s O rigin and H is to ry . Hawick, S co tlan d : James Edgar, P u b lis h e r, n .d . Sm all, R obert, H isto ry o f th e C ongregations o f th e U nited Presby­ te r ia n Church from 1735 to 1900. V ol. I I . Edinburgh: David M. Sm all, 1904. Sweet, L ouis Matthews, James O rr — An A p p re cia tio n . The B ib le M agazine. Vol. 1, No. 12, (December 1913), pp. 951-953.

NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCH O OL OF EDUCATION ®

LIBRARY

e