FroudetellsusthathefoughtagainstDarwinism，butapparently’dreadedthatitmightturnouttrue。’213*Yetisnotthedoctrineofthe’survivalofthefittest’justthescientificversionofCarlyle’stheoryofthe’identityofRightandMight’？
Wasnotevolutionreallyinharmonywithhisconclusion？Tohim，accordingtoFroude，itseemedthatScienceledto’LucretianAtheism。’HestillbelievedinGod，butwhenFroudeoncesaidthathecouldonlybelieveinaGodwhodidsomething，Carlylereplied，withacryofpainwhichIFroudeshallneverforget，Hedoesnothing！’Thereconstructionwhichwastofollowthedestructionwasindefinitelydelayed。Theherodidnotcome；andCarlylewasaprophetwhohadledhisfollowersintothedesert，butfoundthatthelandofpromisealwaysturnedouttobeamirage。Carlyleheldthathypocrisywasstillworsethanmaterialism；but，ashegrewolderandwatchedmoderntendencies，hebecamelesshopefulofthe’ExodusfromHoundsditch，’andsometimeswishedtheoldsheltertoremainstanding。HeshrankevenfromtheessayistsandreviewersandfromColenso，thoughhehadrejectedhistoricalcreedsfarmoresummarilythantheyhaddone。
Carlyle，then，andMauricemightbothbecalled’mystics’inthesufficientlyvaguesenseusedbyCarlylehimself。Theyobjecttologiconprinciple。Theyappealtocertainprimitiveinstinctswhichcanbeoverriddenbynologicalmanipulationsorbyanyappealtooutwardfacts。Both，afterall，areforcedintheendtoconsidertheplain，simple，’objective’test。Mauricefindsthathemustanswerthequestionofthehistoricalcritic：arethestatementsoffacttrueorfalse？Carlyle，notseekingforabasetosupportanyparticularcreed，canthrowtheThirty-nineArticlesoverboard，butfinallycomesintoconflictwithscientificconceptionsingeneral。Hefindshimselfopposedtothescientificviewofhistoricalevolution，andseesinthemostconspicuoustendenciesofmodernthoughtthedisappearanceofallthemostennoblingbeliefs。The’supernatural’and’transcendental’have，afterall，toconformtotheprosaicmatteroffactunderstanding。Accepting，asIdo，whatIsupposetobethescientificview，IfullybelievethatCarlyle’smethodiserroneous；thatindenouncingscientificmethodsassimplymaterialistic，heisopposingthenecessarylogicofintellectualdevelopment，andthathishero-worshipandtheoryofrightreallyleadtoarbitraryandchaoticresults。
Thereis，however，anotherremarktobemade。IfCarlyle’sviewofascientificdoctrinebecorrect；ifitslegitimateresultbethedestructionofmorality，ofallourhighestaspirations，evenofanybeliefintherealityofthemindortheemotions；iftheuniverseistobemadeintoadeadmechanismorahugeswine’strough，wearecertainlyreducedtoamostterribledilemma。ItwasreallythedilemmafromwhichCarlylecouldneverescape，andtheconsciousnessofwhichtormentedhimtothelast。Hehadtochoosebetweenallegiancetomoralityandallegiancetotruth。Scientifictendencies，especiallyasembodiedinUtilitarianism，seemedtomanymen，and，asCarlyle’scaseshows，tothemenofthehighestabilities，tohavethattendency。Theabsolutesincerityofthatconvictionisunmistakable。Idonotdoubtthatmen，holdingtheconvictionsincerely，wereboundtoseeksomeescape；norcouldIcondemnthemifundersoterribleadilemmatheyallowedtheirloveoftruthtobepartlyobscured。Infact，too，Ithinkthatitcannotbedeniedthatmanyofthementowhomweowemost，whosemoralitywasthehighestandmoststimulating，andwho，moreover，weremosthostiletothelowerformsofsuperstition，didinfacttakethisposition。ThoughMauricewasfarfromclear-headed，I
fullybelievethathisliberalandhumanespiritwasofthegreatestvalue，andthathedidmorethanmostmentoraisethesocialtoneinregardtothegreatestproblems。Carlyle’sdoctrineis，Iequallybelieve，radicallyincoherent；butIamalsoconvincedthatCarlyle’simpetuousandvehementassertionofcertaingreatsocial，ethical，andpoliticalprincipleswasofthehighestvalue。Itmustbeallowed，Ithink，thatsuchmenasCarlyleandEmerson，forexample，vagueandevencontradictoryaswastheirteaching，didmoretorouseloftyaspirationsandtomoralisepoliticalcreeds，thoughlessfortheadvancementofsoundmethodsofinquiry，thantheteachingoftheUtilitarians。
TherewassomewhereagapintheUtilitariansystem。Itsattackuponthemythologicalstatementsoffactmightbevictorious；butitcouldnotsupplytheplaceofreligioneithertothevulgarortotheloftiestminds。Thentheproblemariseswhethertheacceptanceofscientificmethod，andofanempiricalbasisforallknowledge，involvestheacceptanceofalowermoralstandard，andofamaterialismwhichdeniestheexistenceorthevalueofalltheunselfishandloftierelementsofhumannature？Canweadheretofactswithoutabandoningphilosophy；oradoptaloftycodeofethicswithoutlosingourselvesindream-land？Somethinkerssoughtadifferentlineofescape。
IX。DOGMATISM
The’OxfordMovement，’accordingtoNewman，wasreallystartedonthe14thJuly1833byKeble’ssermonon’NationalApostasy。’The’movement’hasbecomethesubject-matterofvastmassesofliterature，asbecomesamovementamongacultivatedclass。WhileMillandhisfriendswereundertheimpressionthatreasonwastriumphantandtheologyeffete，theghostoftheolddoctrinaldisputessuddenlycameabroad。Learnedscholarsoncemoreplungedintodogmatictheology，renewedtheoldclaimsofthechurch，andseriouslyarguedastowhatprecisecharmwouldsaveaninfantfromthewrathofarighteousGod。Whatexplanationcanbegivenofthissingularphenomenon？Therewasclearlya’reaction，’butwhyshouldtherebeareaction？TheEvangelicalmovementhadbeenmainlyethicalorphilanthropical。
Itprotestedagainstevilswhenthenationalconsciencewasalreadyinadvanceoftheactualpractice。Thatwasitsstrength；
itsweaknesswasthatitaccepted，withoutexamination，thecurrentbeliefsoftheday，andsimplydidwithoutphilosophy。
TheOxfordmovement，thoughmanyofitsleaderswerekeenlyawaketosocialevils，didnotstartprimarilyfromadesireforsocialreform。Norcanitsoriginbetraceddirectlytoaphilosophicaldevelopment。Itsleadershad，ofcourse，beeninfluencedbyliteraryandspeculativedevelopments。Theyhad，asNewmantellsus，beenstirredbyScottandWordsworthandbyColeridge’sphilosophy。Andyetitisplainenoughthattheimpulsedidnotstartfromphilosophicalspeculation。ThemovementcorrespondedtochangeswhichwouldbepartofthewholehistoryofEuropeanthought。IhavesaidenoughoftheUtilitarianstoindicatethespecialEnglishconditions。TheUtilitarianssawintheestablishedchurchthemostpalpableillustrationofa’sinisterinterest。’Benthamwasattacking’ChurchofEnglandism’；JamesMillwasproposingtoapplyBentham’sprinciplesbysubstitutinganethicaldepartmentoftheStateforachurch，andreplacingthesacramentbytea-parties；theradicalsofallvarietiesregardeddisestablishmentanddisendowmentasthenaturalcorollaryfromtheReformBill，andaWhigstatesmansignificantlyadvisedtheprelatestoputtheirhouseinorder。
Itwastakenasahinttoprepareforconfiscation。
YettheChurchwasenormouslystrong；itwasinterwovenwiththewholepoliticalandsocialorganisation，andthegenuineradicalrepresentedonlyafractionofthepopulation。Oxfordinparticular，theveryfocusofconservativeandaristocraticinterests，thefavouriteplaceforsuchcultureaswaspopularwiththelandowners，theclergy，andalltheassociatedclasses，wasstartledandalarmed，andbegantorouseitslatentenergy。
IntoOxfordnoseriousphilosophicalmovementhadpenetrated。Ithadbeenslowlyamendingitssystem，butitstilladheredinsubstancetotheancienttraditions。Dimlyitknewthatinfidelsandrationaliserswerepreachingdangeroustheories。PuseyhadvisitedGermanyin1825-27，andhadcomebackwithsomeknowledgeofGermanthought。Hewasevenaccused，verysuperfluously，ofrationalism。Ofthattherewasnorealdanger214*foramanthoroughlysteepedintheOxfordspirit。AsufficientillustrationofOxfordeducationmaybefoundinthecuriouscontroversybetweenCopleston，whohaddonemuchtorousehisUniversity，andtheEdinburghReviewers。Coplestonrepliedvigorously，andyethisboastisatacitconfession。HedeclaresthatOxfordpossessesgoodclassicalscholars，andweneednotinquirehowfartheywerereallyabreastoftheday。OxfordmenhadtogetuplogicinAldrichandmakesomeacquaintancewithAristotle；andhearguesthatthemathematicalstudiesoftheplaceweremorethan’elementary。’Theywereevenbeginningtoinclude’fluxions。’Ifthiswereamatterforboasting，itcouldnotbeseriouslyheldthatOxfordwasdoinganythingcomparabletotheGermanuniversitiesasanadequateorganofthenationalintellect。215*Inpointoffact，thesystemallowedthegreatmajoritytoremainincompleteignoranceofanyrecentmovementsoflivingspeculation，acenturyortwobehind-handinphilology，andabsolutelyindifferenttoscience。Naturally，whenthechampionsoftheChurchcameouttofight，theywerearmedwithantiquatedweapons。Yetmanyofthemweremenofgreatability，andoneatleastamanofmostindisputablegenius。
ThealarmspreadbyradicalassaultsupontheChurchwasequallyfeltbytheliberaldivines。Noone，forexample，wasmorealarmedthanDrArnold。ButArnold，amanofloftyandgenerousinstinctsandstrongpoliticalinterests，tooktheessentiallyliberalview。TheChurch，asallactive-mindedmenagreed，wasindanger。Itwasthreatenedby’thegodlessparty，’
theradicalsandrevolutionistswhoweretheheirsofjacobinism，andwereashatefultohimastothehigh-churchmen。Butherehisdiagnosisbecomesessentiallydifferent。ArnoldthoughtthattheChurchhadbecomeaseparatesectbecauseitadheredtooldprejudicesandtosacerdotalism。Hisremedywastomakeittrulynational，bywideningitsborders，admittingdissenters，andencouragingphilosophicthought。TheChurchshouldbe，asColeridgeurged，anessentialpartoftheStateorganism；notaclosecorporationbelongingtoapriestlyorder。ItwasproperlyidenticalwiththeState。ItmustbeliberalisedthattheStatemightbemadereligious，anddroptheantiquatedclaimstomagicalauthoritywhichopposedittothecommonsenseofthemassesandthereasonofthethinkers。216*Thiswaspreciselytheantithesistotheviewtakenbytheleadersofthe’movement。’TheyheldthattheChurchwasweak，preciselybecauseithadbeenunfaithfultoitshigherclaimsandmadeanalliancewiththeState，whichhadpassedintoabondage。This，then，isoneaspectofthedivisionbetweentheliberalsandthedogmatists；andwhatIhavenowtodoistoendeavourtoindicatethedogmaticalview。
Iconfinemyselftotworepresentativesofthemovement：
Newman，whoseliterarygeniusneedsnoemphasis；andW。G。Ward，conspicuousasonewhonevershrankfromaninference，andwho，todohimbarejustice，wasincapableofsupportinglogicbymisrepresentinghisopponents。HerepresentstheforlornHope，andrevealsthetendencieswhichfrightenedhislessdaringcomrades。
Thetruestarting-pointofthe’movement’canhardlybegivenmoredistinctlythaninWard’sIdealofaChristianChurch。217*
ItrepresentsthestageatwhichWardwasbecomingfullyawareoftheconsequencesofhisownlogicalposition。TheIdealhasceasedtobelivelyreading；itislikeanechofromoldcommon-roomdisputationsofyoungmenintenselyinterestedintheecclesiasticalmovementsoftheday。WardcontraststheactualChurchofEnglandwiththeidealChurchofChrist，andalreadyfindsintheChurchofRomeamorepromisingembodimentofthetruespirit。ThetrueChurchisofdivineinstitution，thechannelofsupernaturalgraces，andindependentofallhumanauthority。TheChurchofEngland，ifnotthecreature，hasbecomeinfacttheslave，oftheState。Itclaimsaparliamentarytitle，andinreturnforprivilegeshasabandoneditsrightfulauthority。Aboveall，atruechurchisknownbyitsdiscipline。
Itshouldbetheincarnateconscienceofthesociety，andshouldsuperintend，enforcebyitssanctionsandstimulatebyitsexample，thespiritualnatureofitsmembers。Atruechurchshouldexerciseanomnipresentspiritualauthority，reachingeverydetailoflifeandorganisingtheperpetualwarfareagainsttheworld，theflesh，andthedevil。TheutterdecayofanysuchpoweristhemostfatalsymptomoftheAnglicanbody。Fromacontemporarybook，Wardextractsaghastlyaccountofthemisery，vice，andspiritualdegradationofthemassofthepopulation。218*Toremedysuchevils，hedeclares，the’scienceofdogmatictheology’ismoreessentialthanthescienceofpoliticaleconomy。219*Dogmatictheologyisinfactthebasisof’ascetictheology，’orofthewholetheoryofreligiousdiscipline。If，indeed，theChristiantheologybetakenseriously，ifspiritualdegenerationhasanimportancealtogetheroutofproportiontomaterialprogress，andthesalvationofsoulsbetheonethingnecessary，theconclusionisinevitable。
Toenforcethosetruthsuponthereason，toimpressthemupontheimagination，andtoensureaconstantreferencetotheminallourconduct，mustbetheessentialworkofanauthoritativechurch。WardexpatiatesenthusiasticallyupontheceaselessactivityoftheChurchofRome；upontheelaboratetrainingofthepriesthood；uponthecatechisingofchildren，thedailymeditations，theconstantpracticeofconfession，andthevariousmethodsbywhichthechurchfixestheeyesofbelieverssteadilyuponspiritualrealities。Achurchincapableofthiscannolongerbethesaltoftheearth，and，infact，theChurchofEngland，thoughithasboastedofbeing’thepoorman’schurch，’
hasbeenutterlyblindtothe’accumulatedmassofmiserywhichhasbeengraduallygrowingtoaheadforthelastsixtyyears。’
’Throughnoagencyofhers，’attentionhasbeenrousedbysuchmenasLordAshley；andyetthechurchhasshownnosymptomsofshameatsuchimportantneglect。220*Whatelsecanyouexpectfromtheorganofthecomfortableclasses？