WEEK-DAY RELIGION.

Evening Star, Issue 3690, 20 July 1875, Page 2

WEEK-DAY RELIGION.

Tho course of lectures on the above subject were continued by >)r Roseby on Sunday iu the Congregational Church, Moray place, the subject chosen being “ Doubt,” The rev. gentleman, chosing for his text an expression occurring in Daniel v., 16. spoke of the necessity for including,-in any series of discourses on week-day religion, the subject of doubt. One could not shut one's eyes to the fact that there were numbers of people, he thought there were especially many m this community, whose minds were unsettled on the question of religion ; and although it was not easy to handle the subject ef religious doubt without danger ef offence, he could not persuade himself that it would be right to pass it over. But, if he was to sar anything that would be really helpful to those whose minds were unsettled, he must speak with candor. Ignorant denunciation was cheap and useless. The theological world was already full of it; he hoped to keep his discourse quite free from ic. If the question were raised as concerning the numerous standards of orthodoxy established in the various Christian sects, he had no idea of becoming their champion. All of them, he thought contained the fundamental verities of religion, but all of them contained also much that belonged only to the theory of religion—much that was merely matter of fallible human inference. The rev. gentleman then laid down certain leading principles ; First The supreme value, and freely enduring character of truth. On this point ho remarked, however, that the strongest contrast in the world between truth and falsehood was not that between the man who knows the truth and the man who knows it not, but between the man who is true and the man who is not. The wise and just rule of God would preserve the true man, even though in intellectual error, but would crush the unsound, insincere, false man, let his creed be as true as the Gospel itself. Secondly. The only method of arriving at truth was to maintain always the ever open and Impartial temper of a learner. It was the same in philosophy as in religion, in the search for truth as in the conversion of the soul ; we must “become as little children.” Thirdly. Neither traditionalism, nor antiquity, nor general acceptance was any guarantee of truth. A lie might be faithfully handed down from age to age as well as the truth. “ Custom (said Cyprian), though never so ancient, without tnith is but an old error.” Athannsiug was right coiitra mxmdxtm, If a doctrine was true, the faith of this world could not make it more trae { and the unbelief of the world could not make it less true. Fourthly. The Cardinal doctrine alike of reason and Scripture was, “Test all things, hold fast that which was good.” There was no shorter and easier method of coming at tho truth than tho toilsome, perplexing, and even precarious method of inquiry. Fifthly. In the process of this inquiry there would be a perpetual asking of questions—that is, a perpetual doubting. And now the groat question was: how were they to regard doubts ? Let them suppose a man, filled with the desire of knowing the truth, loving it, and ever praying for the guidance of its light. But light was only gradually vouchsafed. Still, as far as the man saw the truth, he accepted and dung to it. Ho would not profess what he did not believe; he did not believe what as yet he had not sufficient evidence of; and so, in regard to many things, he would be found asking questions—that is, in a condi tion ef doubt. What were they to think of such a man T There were hundreds of such. They could not call them believers; but they had taken a great deal more trouble_ to find out the truth of God than nine-tenths of professed believers had. They were not orthodox, but their restless search for truth proved that they loved it more than nine-tenths of the indolentlv orthodox did. What were they to think of such men ? The Church, for the most part, made short work of them. It settled the question off-hand by a sentence of excommunication. To doubt, it said, was not only sinful, it was damnable. What judgment then are we to form concerning the doubt of an honest, truthloving, and inquiring mind ? He would offer some suggestions by way of answer to the question. (1) Doubt should never he regarded as itself an end. Doubting waa supposed to mean inquiry after truth. But the truth, when found, became an object of earnest faith. (2) Such doubting was not sinful. The doubt that aimed at truth could not be sinful. (3) There waa of course another kind of doubt—a doubt that was sinful. To doubt from prejudice, from loving one’s own •pinion, more than truth, from refusing to let the better impulse of the soul have way, from being out of sympathy with goodness, righteousness and purity—he had nothing to say in apology for such doubt. The lecturer concluded by saying that truth was something to live by. The divine specific for the solution «f doubt was to make the best u-e of the light one had. “If any man be willing to do God’s will, he shall know God’s doctrine “ The path of the just shineth more and more unto the perfect day and the crown of God’s approving benediction at last would always be found to be: “ Thou hast been faithful over a few things—l will make thee ruler over many things.”