Buying papers for college
No question appears to have gravely been raised, c Acts xv. Spirit, by no mere accident did it come to pass that the Church had to work out the Divine plan at first, unaided by the powers of the world. It appears to have been conceived that the course of the Gospel, and the course of the human mind, had hitherto diverged. This dream, it may be hoped, is somewhat dissipated : but let us glance at the theory of this " general Conscience" — (this "public opinion," or opinion of the majority, which was to be the Eule of Eeligion, the " Gospel" of the future m ,)— before we wholly lose sight of it.
We have seen that a " Generalized Christianity" is impossible, if we accept the New Testament at all.
A Eeligion without a Doctrine, or " dogma," must be so transcendental as to lie beyond even the region of j Heb. But the idea of a " gene- ralization of Conscience" or abstract " ethical develop- ment," is still to be considered. No one will question, that in matters of feeling and sentiment there actually is an average Vague standard, in any civilized community. Such an admission, therefore, of " average conscien- tiousness" will not assist " Multitudinism," inasmuch as it depends for its very existence on the action, inward and outward, of each man for himself.
The absence of this, the Christian feels is the fatal defect of every philosophical scheme of polity n Essay, p. In thus urging, we do not attribute to the "Multi- tudinist" a conscious denial of Individual Besponsi- bility, but the maintenance of a position which vir- tually destroys it. He subordinates the sense of right to the existing average of propriety, when he limits the sphere of Conscientiousness, practically, to this world.
At the risk of seeming to elaborate — what many will The real issue of course admit at once — the priority of before the en-. Let men see what the "Broad Christianity" to which they are invited implies morally. Intellectually, it would aim destruction at all Creeds and Doctrines, — reckless of the fact that to deny Christianity as a "theology of the intellect 5 " is to banish it from the realm of truth.
It would also, as we have seen, reject its " Historical character q ," and so consign it, after due "criticism," to the region of fable. They would remove our Chris- tianity from its lofty Moral eminence also. The Soul, and its future, they set aside : and, reversing the in- junction alike of Moses and St. Paul, bid men "follow n In the " Republic" — where the Individual is utterly crushed. It might be omitted, urged, and truly, that Society is bound to protect itself against the aberrations of some, and the moral obliquity of others. For there still remains, all the more firmly esta- blished by these very considerations, what may be termed the substratum of Will to be dealt with, in every man. The proof, indeed, that it makes its appeal to our Moral nature is accessible to every man who will r Exod. Man is so far intended by nature to be a " Self- Of Man as a governing" being, that his highest Moral self-governing. All external governments are no doubt inherently im- perfect, (except that of the Divine Being,) when thus considered as restraints on Individual Will and Power, in the manifestation of which Moral Agency consists. How deep a Moral confusion, then, must enter into the speculation of theorists who transfer the great Moral work of human life, formally, from the Indi- vidual to the Government! And this is what these "New Nationalists" would do. Man is not only capable of originating action, but he is so con- stituted as to know that he ought to originate it, in accordance with some anterior and unchangeable prin- ciples of truth and righteousness.
But his Respon- sibility as a citizen is at present regulated by ever- mutable law.
A man, for instance, is truly enough said to be u obliged" by the laws of the country or illustrations: society to buying papers for college which he belongs.
He is in such wise " responsible " to the laws, that if he violates them he incurs punishment. This kind of responsibility has nothing certainly Moral in it. This Political Responsibility no doubt ought to be Moral i. SociaL limited in their nature in every respect, ) may have customs, habits, and rules, which infer more or less of obligation on the members. Physical, in some sense, be also affirmed of the Phy- sical. A " law of Nature " cannot be broken with impunity. Yet in this case also the consequence follows absolutely, whether our inward Consciousness accompanies it or not. But the idea of a true Moral Responsibility is far 4.
The martyr for liberty wins our approbation, though he perish beneath some legal tyranny. The philanthropist, who unsuccessfully withstands some evil social custom, obtains eventually the applause of the human Conscience. The votary of knowledge, whose DISTINCTION OF RESPONSIBILITY AND PROBATION. But the subject must not further be pursued here, though most important and attractive. It is a result which satisfies the phenomena of Social Moral agency. But, viewed relatively to the Individual him- self, this certainly is not enough.
We must conceive, then, that the forming and perfecting of the character of each Moral Agent, for his attainment of the Highest Good, is the end of present Probation. But it may be well to add that, prone as we are Relation of the to crave for something less changeable Individual to the. Knowing, as the Chris- tian does, the need which Conscience has of illumination RELATIONS OF CONSCIENCE AND SOCIETY. Mill t can afford to risk entire freedom for the intellect, we may at least maintain that Conscience may be equally trusted. But there is one further aspect of the subject, and bearing directly on Political Kesponsibility, which must not in this place be omitted. And nothing which has been said ought to cast doubt on the solemn fact, that the State has such duties. To put the question in more philosophical terms, — it amounts to an enquiry into the Mutual Eelations of the buying papers for college Individual Conscience, and the Society of which it is a member. It is evident that these relations are subject to change, as civilization advances. It must be remem- bered too, that the human individual is intended at all times to develope in Society, — a fact which of itself implies duties of the whole to the parts, as well as of the parts to the whole. But the laws of the Society and the convictions of the Individual having thus, alike, an ethical basis, buying papers for college must be judged ethically. In the best conceivable polity a law would buying papers for college always be moral, — i.
We cannot even conceive of the permanent existence of a system of law condemned by every individual conscience. The de jure relation of law and morals is therefore assumed in such passages as St. A large class of Mixed questions, connected with per- sonal and domestic rights, — such as Education, Mar- riage, Inheritance, Service, — may long need for their settlement the exercise of political patience.