Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 86

Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism.

It is for the clear exposition of this point that we ought to feel indebted to Judge Higinbotham, but before I proceed to discuss the remaining portions of his lecture let me draw your attention for a moment to the question of anthropomorphism. Anthropomorphic conceptions of the Deity prevailing in the doctrines and teachings of the Church, you will remember, was one of the reasons assigned by the Judge to account for the waning power of the Churches, for he rightly pointed out that such conceptions were not in harmony with the teachings of modern science. One clergyman, at least, who has attempted to criticise the Judge's lecture, has had the temerity to assert that anthropomorphism does not prevail amongst the educated clergy of the Church, I think it can be shown that the conceptions of the Church concerning Deity are necessarily anthropomorphic, and that the Judge himself, bolding the opinions that he does, cannot escape the taint that his lecture professes to condemn, Anthropomorphism, as you arc aware, is the system that endows the supreme power that is assumed to govern the universe, with human attributes—it conceives God in the likeness of a man, The clergyman to whom I have referred, while denying that anthropomorphism prevails in the Churches asserts that it is merely owing to the imperfections of language that we are compelled to speak as if we believed that God possessed human attributes. It seems to me, on the other hand, that if we admit the idea of God at all, and at the same time mtke any predication whatever about him, we are compelled to speak of him as possessing some attributes of humanity, not from the mere imperfections of language, but from the imperfection of thought. It is perfectly logical, in fact it seem a necessity of thought, to admit the existence of a something underlying the world of phenomena in which we live and of which we are a part. But when we go so far as even to predicate that that something, power, call it what you will, is an intelligent power you at once fall into anthropomorphism. Yon cannot make the smallest predication about it without picturing it to the mind in terms of something seen or touched, and in doing so you are going beyond the limits of possibilities of experience. This is a necessity of thought. Even to think about a thing you must think about its parts, If anyone can picture something to his mind, without picturing some attributes also, he must have a mind that is more than human, It is absolutely unthinkable, it is absolutely impossible, to make a synthetic proposition concerning Deity or anything else without at the same time predicating attributes of it. And so I say that anyone who makes any predication whatever concerning Deity must necessarily endow that Deity with some qualities, must in some manner or other picture him to the mind (if he does not do this his predication means nothing), and, therefore, he necessarily falls into anthropomorphism, for he cannot do less than endow that Deity with the highest qualies be is capable of imagining. These qualities are necessarily human, as human attributes are the highest known to man. That the clergy and the Church itself do endeavour to do this is a matter of certainty, not of doubt They believe in an intelligent power, and so does Judge Higin-batham, This is quite sufficient to fix the taint of anthropomorphism on to them and him. Judge Higinbotham talks of "God revealed anew to the intellect and to the responsive human heart, as the Father the, Friend, the Guide, and the Support of our race, and of every member of it." If this is not anthropomorphism then I do not know what that term means; and although I think that the Judge is perfectly right in condemning the anthropomorphic conceptions prevailing in the Church, and in pointing out that such are not in harmony with the teachings of modern science, but on the other band, that they are grossly fallacious and greatly to be page 8 reprobated, yet I do think that the Judge is hardly logical in condemning a system which he has failed to eradicate from his own opinions But although the Judge appears at times to be extremely illogical, I do not think that this at all deteriorates from the service he has done in indicating so clearly and so strikingly the discord existing; between the stereotyped character of the Church and the requirements of modern thought.