polytheism return upon us—a polytheism which I do not on this occasion defend, for my only aim at present is to keep the testimony of religious experience clearly within its proper bounds. Upholders of the monistic view will say to such a polytheism (which, by the way, has always been the real religion of common people, and is so still to-day) that unless there be one all-inclusive God, our guarantee of security is left imperfect. In the Absolute, and in the Absolute only, all is saved. If there be different gods, each caring for his part, some portion of some of us might not be covered with divine protection, and our religious consolation would thus fail to be complete. It goes back to what was said on pages 131-133, about the possibility of there being portions of the universe that may irretrievably be lost. Common sense is less sweeping in its demands than philosophy or mysticism have been wont to be, and can suffer the notion of this world being partly saved and partly lost. The ordinary moralistic state of mind makes the salvation of the world conditional upon the success with which each unit does its part. Partial and conditional salvation is in fact a most familiar notion when taken in the abstract, the only difficulty being to determine the details. Some men are even disinterested enough to be willing to be in the unsaved remnant as far as their persons go, if only they can be persuaded that their cause will prevail — all of us are willing, whenever our activity-excitement rises sufficiently high. I think, in fact, that a final philosophy of religion will have to consider the pluralistic hypothesis more seriously than it has hitherto been willing to consider it. For practical life at any rate, the chance of salvation is enough. No fact in human nature is more characteristic than its willingness to live on a chance. The existence of the chance makes the difference, as Edmund Gurney says, between a life of which the keynote is resignation and a life of which the keynote is hope.' But all these statements are unsatisfactory from their brevity, and I can only say that I hope to return to the same questions in another book. Tertium Quid, 1887, p. 99. See also pp. 148, 149. BEHMEN, see BOEHME. BOWNE, 502. BRAINERD, 212, 253. Buddhism, 31, 34, 522. CAIRD, EDWARD, 106. CAIRD, J., on feeling in religion, 434; CALL, 289. CARLYLE, 41, 300. CARPENTER, 319. Catharine, Saint, of Genoa, 289. Catholicism and Protestantism pared, 114, 227, 336, 461. Causality of God, 517, 522. CENNICK, 301. com- Centres of personal energy, 196, 267, Cerebration, unconscious, 207. CHANNING, 300, 488. CHAPMAN, 324. Character, cause of its alterations, 193; Causes of its diversity, 261; balance Charity, 274, 278, 310, 355. Belief, due to non-rationalistic impulses, Chastity, 310. Chiefs of tribes, 371. Christian Science, 106. Christ's atonement, 129, 245. Churches, 335, 460. CLARK, 389. CLISSOLD, 481. COE, 240. Consistency, 296. Conversion, to avarice, 178. Cosmic consciousness, 398. Crankiness, see Psychopathy. Criteria of value of spiritual affections, EDWARDS, MRS. J., 276, 280. Ego of Apperception, 449. EMERSON, 32, 56, 167, 205, 239, 330. Ether, mystical effects of, 392. Excitement, its effects, 195, 266, 279, Experience, religious, the essence of, Extravagances of piety, 339, 486. EDWARDS, JONATHAN, 20; 114, 200,Gifts,' 151. 229, 238, 239, 248, 330. Glory of God, 342. |