in him an able opponent. He has given himself up to the stream of enthusiasm which runs stronger than ever at Oxford. He shows all the vehemence of fanaticism, all its pretended feeling, and all its real unsociableness.

It is curious that he remarks against Dr. Hampden, that admitting principles which lead to what he calls Cousin's views, the Doctor still professes himself a member of the Church of England. He does not, however, perceive that his own love of truth is equally contradicted by an entirely opposite process.

He and all his party oppose certain principles without proper examination, because they know that they lead directly to certain consequences. Which is the more to blame of these two processes? The latter, I think. Dr. Hampden, and others in circumstances like his, deny the inference which is drawn by their adversaries. Now, it is unquestionable, that there is always more room for doubt when inferences are to be drawn from distant principles, than when the inference is acknowledged, and the question is about the truth of the first links in a chain of argument. In the question between Dr. Hampden and his opponents, it is not difficult to show that the foundations of the latter are exceedingly weak-unhistorical-mere suppositions. They strongly suspect this: yet they reject all examination, and cling to their notions from affection. They reject reason because they find it against them. This is open rebellion. Those that acknowledge its eternal

rights, but fall short of complete obedience, are pardonable sinners, not rebels.

December 24th, 1839.

What is Enthusiasm ?-If my memory does not deceive me, the author of the Natural History of Enthusiasm forgets to define the word which expresses his subject. Let me try to find a suitable definition or description.

Enthusiasm, etymologically considered, is an impulse, or excitement of mind, and is always supposed to be attended with more or less disturbance and agitation of the animal spirits. But here we must distinguish between enthusiasm connected with the invisible world, which is properly "religious enthusiasm," and that ardour required in all great enterprises, which has no reference to religion. The latter must be left out of this inquiry, as being only figuratively and by analogy called enthusiasm. Religious enthusiasm has this characteristic property, that through a nervous affection, it diminishes the impression of reality produced by the external world, and attaches it to that world, which whether it exist or not, out of us, has for us only the subjective reality, which we find in our imagination. Enthusiasm therefore originates in the imagination, and depends for its activity on all the physical and pathological causes which excite that faculty.

Let us further observe, that since Man is essentially rational, he cannot be in a healthy or right state, when the Imagination takes in him the lead, especially if that faculty manifests the symptoms of nervous excitement. Enthusiasm that enthusiasm which is chiefly guided by notions unsupported by rational experience-is a morbid state of the human faculties, which attributes more certainty to the representations of the Imagination than to the established results of experience.'

The clearest instance of enthusiasm is found in the legend of Abraham, if taken as history. Abraham thinks that he sees God, and hears him speak to him. Were he not in a state of morbid enthusiasm, he must have perceived that this notion was absurd. Upon what ground can he believe that he sees God? Has God a visible person? If he has, by what means shall Abraham find that the figure he sees is that of God, and not that of some other unknown-may be, mischievous being ?-" Persons favoured with revelations, it is said, must have had some way, unknown to us, to ascertain their reality." But could that method be resolved into anything but the vision itself the subjective notion that God had taught them that method? Any rational man who perceived in himself a tendency to see visions, should immediately suspect his own state of health. And what shall we say to Abraham's absurdity in believing that this unknown vision had a right to demand the life of Isaac, at his hands? Which is more probable;

that God should ask for a human sacrifice, or that Abraham was subject to fits of delirium ?-Abraham, it is said, doubted not. Here we have the characteristic symptom of Enthusiasm-certainty-established on grounds that will bear no examination.

Enthusiasm is, therefore, inseparable from Church Christianity. That Christianity began in enthusiasm. What else was that vehement and almost phrenzied belief in the approaching second coming of Christ to reign on earth with those who, having endured martyrdom, would be entitled to the first resurrection? It is, indeed, remarkable, that true enthusiasm increases in proportion as its grounds or supposed foundations become weaker. The Christians' contempt of life was greater in the third century, than in the second and the first. As history became faint and shadowy, the Christians' convictions grew to be irresistible.

Whoever believes that things spiritual, as they are called, are more credible than things visible,-that the interests of a life to come should disturb and confound those of the present, is an enthusiast: his belief is disproportioned to its proofs. Alas! what a mass of evil arises from this quiet and settled enthusiasm! Persecution of some kind is its inevitable consequence. It is much easier to know a good man, than to know who is in possession of true doctrines. But enthusiasm overlooks the proofs of moral goodness, and, giving the preference to those of orthodoxy, will sooner join in communion with the

King of Hanover, than with a Unitarian whose character was ever free from even a suspicion.

My dear Sir,

From Dr. Channing.

Boston, November 20th, 1839.

I received your last quite unexpectedly, and reply to it at once, not to lay you under an obligation of answering, but because you take pleasure in hearing from me, and I feel your right to every service in my power. I rejoice that you are enjoying more comfort—and that the mind is unharmed. May this unspeakable good be continued. Let the inward life strengthen, and the decay of this poor tabernacle is a matter of no great moment. I cannot agree with every part of your letter. You seem to me to make religion too exclusively a product of the Reason, and carry your jealousy of the Imagination too far, though such jealousy is most natural in one, bred to Catholicism. If imagination had no office but to give material forms to God and Heaven, I should agree with you; but is it not the function of this glorious faculty to see in the Universe a type of the Divinity, in the sun a shadow of his glory, in the beautiful, sublime and awful of nature the signs of spiritual beauty and power? Is not the imagination the principle which tends to the Ideal, which rises above the finite and existent, which conceives of the Perfect, of what eye hath not seen or ear heard? I suppose we differ chiefly in words. I consider religion, however, as founded in the joint operation of all our powers, as revealed by the Reason, the Imaginative and the Moral sentiments. think too you speak too disparagingly of Historical Christianity, though here also I may misapprehend you. To me the history of Christianity in the gospels is inestimable. The life, spirit, works and