74

EDUCATION OF THE POOR.

the consideration of the Mosaic system, and propounded to the students there, his conviction that the whole of that system, instead of being a revelation, was a mere matter of priestcraft! On what possible ground can it be defensible, after this, to refuse to the student a knowledge of what can be said in defence of that which this professor has, in his wisdom, or his ignorance, presumed to hold up to hatred or contempt, and to which others must of necessity constantly allude?

If we pass from the education of the rich to that of the poor, although we cannot expect to see the recognition of the supremacy of the intellect as clearly marked out there, it still meets the eye in characters too plain to be mistaken. In the education of the poor more especially, religious knowledge should be made the only basis, the one thing needful -and whatever else is taught, should be taught only after that, and avowedly in subordination to it. But although in one large portion of our schools, religion is made an indispensable part of the system, in the other division, on the ground of the varying opinions of the children's friends, no direct religious instruction is given. It is alleged, however, that the Bible is read, and that it is unjust to say, that the supporters of these schools are careless about religion, when they assign so good a reason for the omission of direct religious instruction. I do not impugn the

EDUCATION OF THE POOR.

75

sincerity of many who give this answer; I only reply, that their reasons are not satisfactory to any but themselves; and that although I am very far from undervaluing the advantage to be gained by children, from the Bible, as a mere lesson-book, I cannot think, that the instruction so gained is in any degree sufficient.

The question, it must be remembered, is not whether any good can be gained by the method proposed, whether such imperfect instruction is not better than the total want of all instruction, if it were certain that no better system could be brought into practice; but whether the system which looks only to making children fit for the business of life, which professes only to give them the power of reading, writing, and performing simple operations in arithmetic, and omits direct religious instruction, deserves the name of education; and whether it is built on right and satisfactory principles. We contend that it prefers the temporal to the eternal, and virtually lays it down as a principle, that even a short and imperfect cultivation of the intellect, will enable us to dispense with religious instruction, and will supply such motives and restraints as are sufficient for the moral guidance of an immortal being through a scene of trial and temptation.

It is surely a very startling state of things, to find

76

PALEY'S MORAL PHILOSOPHY.

such broad assertions, that the mere possession of the elements of knowledge, will save and will recall man from moral evil, that neither in the education of high and low, need religion be made the basis, and that the moral and prudential restraints which a habit of reading will suggest, will be a sufficient guide of life; to find it held, in a word, that even the heathen notion, that religion might be useful to restrain those, whom neither prudential motives nor human laws could withhold from crime, ascribes too much to religion, and assigns to it a value and importance to which it is not entitled, or, at least, which it is unnecessary to give it. When we have arrived at such a state of belief as this, I need hardly add a word to shew, that we are not in a condition very favourable to Christianity.

It cannot be denied, that this desire to erect a despotism of intellect, and this belief in the power of intellectual cultivation to effect so much in reforming and improving mankind, are really existing features of society in the present day, nor that while they last, their operation on Christianity must necessarily be very powerful, and very unfavourable. But in combination with them, we find another engine of extraordinary power at work; a belief, I mean, in the guiding and restraining influence of expediency. Without enquiring now, how far Paley ought to

DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER OF MODERN UNBELIEF. 77

have foreseen, or did foresee, the effect of his book, how far the doctrines which he taught were new, how far he meant to carry them, or what checks he has provided against the abuse of them, it appears to me impossible to doubt that his work has, at all events, popularised the belief, that expediency furnishes the world with sufficient motives to virtuous action, and sufficient control over vice. To Paley we owe it, that, to use Mr. Coleridge's eloquent words, "the guess-work of general consequences has been substituted for moral and political philosophy, adopted as a text-book in one of the universities, and cited as authority in the legislature." At all events, by whomsoever, and by whatsoever means established, there is established, to a very great and serious extent, a conviction in the sufficiency of prudential consideration to check and guide mankind.

If what I have said in the preceding pages be just, it will appear, that while in former times the direction which unbelief took was that of direct attack on the evidences of Christianity, or on the value of its doctrines; the distinctive character of modern unbelief is the attempt to supersede Christianity, and to make men moral, without its guiding and restraining influence. It is assumed, in short, if not asserted, that good instruction and prudential feelings are enough for a man; that his interest

78

CONTEMPT OF OUR ANCESTORS.

will save him from vice, and that the cultivation of his intellect will lead him on to virtue.

Wherever

this monstrous delusion subsists, can any real value for Christianity be felt, any perception of its aim and object, any need of its assistance, any sense of its dignity and beauty? Will there not, on the other hand, necessarily arise a dislike and aversion towards it, from the consciousness, that it not only will admit no such pretenders as expediency and intellectual cultivation to share its sway, but that it must proscribe them as a mere delusion, when they step beyond their proper sphere, and proclaim themselves the sufficient guides of mankind.

This is the main source of danger, but from other causes, and especially from our ignorance, jointly with our contempt of our ancestors, arise numberless evils to the cause of Christianity. How easy is it, under such circumstances, to brand any thing, which runs counter to the current of popular opinion and popular convenience, and on that account alone, is perhaps of inestimable value, with the name of mysticism, superstition, or priestcraft, and thus to get rid of it? It has been said, with great truth, that our contempt of judicial astrology and divination in the present day, though it is a just contempt, is in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred an ignorant contempt, and that Sir Isaac Newton did not reject astrology