On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
has made virtue to consist in qualities useful and agreeable to ourselves and others . It seems then to me that religion and morality ought to be differently defined ; that the first consists in voluntary obedience to the will of God , and the last ( at least that part of it which we have now to consider ) in benevolence . It is hardly necessary to repeat , that as obedience to the will of God includes benevolence , morality is a part of religion .
2 . My second objection to the definition pf Paley is , that it excludes actions of disinterested benevolence , such actions being , I conceive , virtuous in the highest degree . What
are the ordinary sentiments of mankind on this subject ? What is it that commands our highest esteem , regard and affection ? It is pure disinterested piety and benevolence . It is the heart devoted to God and
desiring above all things to do his will . It is the kindly , tender feeling of benevolence which acts solely with a view to the happiness of its object . Only let us imagine a father who never confers a benefit upon his son , never does a single action to promote his happiness except with a view to his own future reward . Would such
a being command our approbation ? Certainly not . Nor should we think one who obeyed the command of God merely for the sake of everlasting happiness , had made any great advances in piety . Not only , however , are those actions which are
founded on an expectation of a reward preferred to those of disinterested piety and benevolence , but the latter class is , by the terms of the definition , excluded from being virtue at all . One may at least imagine a man whose heart is deeply penetrated with the love of God and filled with
benevolence to his fellow-man , pursuing a course of conduct solely regulated by piety and goodness , and without a thought of a reward for his virtues ^ Can we conceive any thing in human nature more lovely and admirable tkan this ? Perhaps no human being may have completely itttaijied this state , but I doubt not
that many have approximated to it , and our estpem p ^ d respect for them could not tail to rise in proportion as we . conceived them to have approached at , Your carresp < m < kni then seems
Untitled Article
to have little reason to find fault with Dr . Brown , who represents Paley ' s ethical system as ** degrading to the human character , * and is surely not justified in branding him with the unmerited reproach of being a narro wminded declaimer . But Clericus Cantabrigiensis is afraid that , if we reject Paley ' s definition , we shall be obliged to prefer the heroism of Codrus , Curtius and
the Decii to the fortitude of the martyrs . I have no hesitation in saying , that if I thought that those Heathen worthies- acted with a benevolent view , and that the martyrs submitted to their sufferings merely for the sake of a future reward , that I should deem the actions of the Heathens
more virtuous than the voluntary sufferings of the martyrs . But I see no ground to make such an assumption respecting the martyrs - On the contrary , it appears to me highly
probable that many of them would willingly have endured all that was inflicted on them in obedience to the will of God , and for the purpose of advancing the cause of true religion , in the world . I must add a few words
to prevent misconception . Let it not be supposed that the writer of this letter undervalues the doctrine of future rewards and punishments as revealed in the Christian Scriptures . On the contrary , he considers that
doctrine of supreme importance . Though disinterested piety and benevolence appear to him the perfection of man , it is only by sloyv degrees and a long process of disciplining the mind that we can reach that state of
perfection . The doctrine of future rewards and punishments is addressed to our self-love which is an essential part of our nature . It is indeed impossible to conceive any conscious , reflecting being without self-love . That an intelligent being should be
indifferent about his own happiness is an absolute impossibility . But self-love is not inconsistent with piety and benevolence , though it is not the same thing as Dr ? Paley and your correspondent represent it to be .
The excess of self-love only is deserving of blame , ^// - /^ and selfishness should ever be distinguished ; the first merely aiming at its own happiness , the last pursuing that cfcd at the expense of the h » p-
Untitled Article
678 On Paleys Definition of Virtue .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1826, page 678, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2554/page/42/
-