Produced by PG Distributed Proofreaders
- or -
Francis William Newman, 1874
This is perhaps an egotistical book; egotistical certainly in itsform, yet not in its purport and essence.
Personal reasons the writer cannot wholly disown, for desiring toexplain himself to more than a few, who on religious grounds areunjustly alienated from him. If by any motive of curiosity orlingering remembrances they may be led to read his straightforwardaccount, he trusts to be able to show them that he has had no choicebut to adopt the intellectual conclusions which offend them;—thatthe difference between them and him turns on questions of Learning,History, Criticism and Abstract Thought;—and that to make theirresults (if indeed they have ever deeply and honestly investigatedthe matter) the tests of his spiritual state, is to employ unjustweights and a false balance, which are an abomination to the Lord. Todefraud one's neighbour of any tithe of mint and cummin, would seemto them a sin: is it less to withhold affection, trust and freeintercourse, and build up unpassable barriers of coldness and alarm,against one whose sole offence is to differ from them intellectually?
But the argument before the writer is something immensely greaterthan a personal one. So it happens, that to vindicate himself is toestablish a mighty truth; a truth which can in no other way so wellenter the heart, as when it comes embodied in an individual case.If he can show, that to have shrunk from his successive convictionswould have been "infidelity" to God and Truth and Righteousness; butthat he has been "faithful" to the highest and most urgent duty;—itwill be made clear that Belief is one thing and Faith another; that tobelieve is intellectual, nay possibly "earthly, devilish;" and thatto set up any fixed creed as a test of spiritual character is a mostunjust, oppressive and mischievous superstition. The historical formhas been deliberately selected, as easier and more interesting tothe reader; but it must not be imagined that the author has given hismental history in general, much less an autobiography. The progressof his creed is his sole subject; and other topics are introducedeither to illustrate this or as digressions suggested by it.
March 22nd, 1850.
I had long thought that the elaborate reply made for me in the
"Prospective Review" (1854) to Mr. Henry Rogers's Defence of the
"Eclipse of Faith," superseded anything more from my pen. But in the
course of six years a review is forgotten and buried away, while Mr.
Rogers is circulating the ninth edition of his misrepresentations.
As my publisher announces to me the opportunity, I at length consentto reply myself to the Defence, cancelling what was previously my lastchapter, written against the "Eclipse."
All that follows p. 175 in this edition is new.
June, 1860.