USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > The memorial history of Boston : including Suffolk County, Massachusetts. 1630-1880, Vol. IV > Part 40
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97
Although Mr. Emerson cannot be said to belong to any school or sys- tem of philosophy as such, yet the character and tendency of his thought
Emerson's writings, both as to style and thought, were regarded at the time: "Mr. Emerson is an extravagant and erratic genius, setting all authority at defiance, sometimes writing with the pen of an angel, and sometimes gravely propounding the most amazing nonsense. . . . He has expressed such sovereign contempt for consistency, that we must not look for that virtue in what he may choose to say; if we do, we shall look in vain. In its place we shall often encounter point blank contradictions. . His writings are thickly studded with oddities gathered from the most unfrequented paths of English literature; and when we add to this the supersublimated transcendentalism of the New Platonic style which he now and then affects, we must not wonder if Mr. Emerson's phraseology frequently passes the comprehension of the vul- gar. Moreover, he plays certain tricks with words which disfigure his pages not a little." Of his Essays the same writer says : " The Essay under the affected title of the 'Oversoul' is the most objectionable of all of them, both as re- gards sentiment and style. . . . From the praises which the author's genius would otherwise de- serve, large deductions must be made on the score of whim, oddity, and affectation." These things read curiously to us who have lived to know the estimation in which Mr. Emerson and his works are now held.
1 A striking instance of this occurred in the inspiring and profoundly touching lecture on
Heroism, so full of deepest eloquence. The audience had been carried on and lifted up by its calm and solemn tone to the passage begin- ning, " Times of heroism are generally times of terror; but the day never shines in which this element may not work." Going on, he says : " More freedom [i. e. at this time] exists for culture. It will not now run against an axe at the first step out of the beaten track of opinion. But whoso is heroic will always find crises to try his edge. Human virtue demands her cham- pions and martyrs, and the trial of persecution always proceeds. It is but the other day that the brave Lovejoy gave his breast to the bullets of a mob, for the right of free speech and opin- ion, and died when it was better not to live." We remember how some of his friends and sympathizers felt the sort of cold shudder which ran through the audience at this calm braving of the current opinion. " He died as the fool dieth " had been the popular dictum about Lovejoy and his death; and this solemn exalting him as a hero and martyr seemed almost an insult to the admiring crowd, who were wholly unprepared for this unexpected turn and shock to their feelings and notions. We have heard some of those who had for him a special regard and sym- pathy describe their terror, almost, at what they felt was so obnoxious to his audience. Mr. Emerson also delivered addresses, by invitation, before the literary societies of Darmouth and Waterville colleges.
307
PHILOSOPHIC THOUGHT IN BOSTON.
place him most decidedly with the Idealist, Intuitive, or Transcendental School,1 of which in popular estimation he stood for the representative and type.
The connection of Dr. Hedge with the Transcendental movement was close and important. His education in Germany, where he had passed some years in the earlier part of his life, had given him, besides a familiarity with the language of that country, an interest in its literature, and developed the taste which has led to his wide and intimate acquaintance with the German philosophy and sympathy with its spirit and ideas. This tendency showed itself while he was a student in the theological school at Cambridge, and then and afterward inspired many of his friends with something of his own interest and enthusiasm. In an article on Coleridge,2 he took occasion to give some account of the leading metaphysicians of Germany-Kant, Fichte, Schelling-and of their systems of philosophy ; and thus placed be- fore the public a distinct exposition and defence of the Transcendental phi- losophy, which may be regarded as an important point in the history of that phase of thought in this vicinity. Speaking of the Transcendental philoso- phy, he characterizes it as " an attempt to penetrate into the most hidden mysteries of our being." To the opponents of this philosophy this attempt seemed both futile and a fruitful source of obscurities and absurdities. In illustration of this view they liked to instance the seemingly unintelligible, or what they chose to consider ridiculous, utterances of those who had a taste for the speculations of that school, or were ranked among its adherents.
In 1851 Dr. Hedge delivered the Dudleian lecture at Harvard College. His subject was " Natural Religion."3 In this he takes the ground that all religious truth is properly revealed; that this belongs to a higher power than the unassisted human understanding ; and that it has received its original light from revelation. The most striking part of this discourse, and what particularly characterizes it, is his criticism of the common argument for the existence of God from instances of design in the universe. He maintains that design is no adequate proof, and indeed is worthless as a proof by which to establish this truth, since in all such reasoning or proof we carry with us an idea of God already existing in our own minds and in no way dependent on the instances of design. He says : -
" The argument from design has its origin in a law of the mind which demands intelligence as the co-ordinate of being. Whatever conviction it produces is due to that law. Besides, though we grant the argument from design the uttermost that can be claimed for it, what does it give us after all, but the wonderful mechanician, the unfathomable artist? What religion wants and declares is a Father in Heaven, a moral Governor, Ruler, and Judge of the rational world. Of this God the natural
1 [See a chapter on "Emerson the Seer " in Frothingham's Transcendentalism in New Eng- land ; and the chapter on " Transcendentalism " in Dr. Bartol's Radical Problems. - ED.]
2 Christian Examiner, March, 1833.
8 The substance of this discourse may be found in an article in the Christian Examiner, vol. xvii. 1852, entitled " Natural Religion."
308
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
proofs are our own consciousness, our moral instincts, and the universal consent of mankind."
Earlier than this, Dr. Hedge had taken some part in the discussion of phrenology, which excited a lively but rather short-lived interest in this community on the occasion of a visit of Dr. Spurzheim, one of its founders and chief advocates. This system excited a good deal of interest, and had a certain popularity, as it seemed to offer a cheap and easy philosophy of the mental and moral faculties (a subject of so much interest), and to put the matter almost literally, so to speak, into the hands of all. Its claims and pretensions were attacked by Dr. Hedge 1 in a tone more sarcastic and less respectful than was his wont in dealing with what was opposed to his views, as its pretensions seemed to him unfounded, and its methods as well as doctrines unphilosophical. He points out the materialistic character of the system, as well as its insufficiency as an account of the mental and moral phenomena of our constitution.
Already, in November, 1833, there had appeared in the Examiner Dr. Hedge's paper on Swedenborg, which is on the whole a favorable view of him and of his place in the philosophy of religion; and it treats his claims with respect and impartiality. A strong interest in the religious doctrines and writings of the Swedish theosopher characterized many other thought- ful persons, and those who consciously or unconsciously were in sympathy with the spiritual philosophy. In Mr. Emerson's Representative Men we find Swedenborg taken as the type of the Mystic, and a very high place assigned to him among the seers, teachers, and prophets of the world. The writings of Sampson Reed, too, an able and devoted follower of Swed- enborg, were inspired and pervaded by his teachings. The writings of Swedenborg were also read and admired by many serious and thoughtful persons who did not accept him in the same sense with Mr. Reed, as an inspired teacher, but who found the truths of divine and human knowledge illustrated by the remarkable insight and profound thought of the Swedish seer. Thus his teachings have had a much wider influence, and have been much more deeply felt, than is represented by the number of the professed receivers of his doctrine.2
Mr. Henry James, too, has devoted much time and subtile thought, in various writings, to illustrate and explain in numerous relations the truths found in the works of Swedenborg, for whose mind and teachings he has shown profound reverence and admiration.
The part and position of George Ripley in the Transcendental movement was an important and prominent one in various ways. His early life was passed at Greenfield, Mass., where he was brought up in the faith and in- fluence of the Orthodox Congregational Church. After the years spent at the University and the Divinity School at Cambridge, he was settled in
1 Christian Examiner, 1834. . lem Church in Boston " in Vol. III., by a son of Sampson Reed. - ED.]
[See the chapter on the " The New Jerusa-
309
PHILOSOPHIC THOUGHT IN BOSTON.
1828 as a clergyman over a Unitarian society in Boston, where he continued as minister for several years. He had an ardent love of knowledge and re- markable power of rapid acquisition; and as his taste led him in the direc- tion of theological and metaphysical studies, he became an acute and accomplished scholar in these departments. His ardent spirit was ever ac-
GEORGE RIPLEY.1
tive, and his industry untiring. While connected with the religious society. he undertook an important literary enterprise, - the publication of a work called Specimens of Foreign Standard Literature, which was continued for some time, and embraced several valuable works. In this series the Philo- sophical Miscellanies of Cousin, Constant, and Jouffroy were translated by
1 [This cut follows a photograph of a crayon in Frothingham's Transcendentalism in New kindly furnished by Mr. Ripley's widow. See a England. - ED.] chapter on "George Ripley, the Man of Letters,"
310
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
Mr. Ripley himself; some of the other volumes, by Mr. John S. Dwight, Miss Margaret Fuller, Mr. W. H. Channing, and Dr. S. Osgood. The first volumes appeared in 1838, the last in 1842. Most of these works were im- bued with the new and fresh thought of the time, and in their general tendency were opposed to the philosophy of experience, as represented by the Locke school. The wide researches of Mr. Ripley led him to acquaint- ance with the German philosophy and theology which then occupied so important a place in the intellectual world, and he became warmly interested in many of the writers of Germany, -in Kant and Herder, and more partic- ularly in Schleiermacher, whom he much admired, and whose statement of religion he found very satisfactory.
Mr. Ripley was always a busy writer, and while minister of the society in Boston he contributed a number of articles to the Christian Examiner, which for a long time was a leading journal of the Unitarian denomination, and embraced in its pages a wide range of discussion on philosophy, morals, and religion. A paper by him on Sir James Mackintosh's work on the moral sentiment goes into a lucid and able discussion of the relation of virtue to utility, and advocates the Intuitive in opposition to the Utilitarian theory of morals and of the ground and origin of moral obligation. This placed him, on the question of morals, as his other writings do on those of religion and philosophy, decidedly in the ranks of the Spiritual or Tran- scendental school.
An important occasion in Mr. Ripley's literary life, and one which added a good deal to his reputation in the theological world, was his controversy with Professor Andrews Norton, of the Cambridge Theological School.1
1 Mr. Norton, in an address before the alumni of the Theological School on what he called the " Latest Form of Infidelity," took·occasion to at- tack what seemed to him the novel and dangerous views of the evidences of Christianity, which, while they either denied or undervalued the proof from miracles, laid the chief stress on the general character of the teachings of Christ and their adaptation to the moral wants and natural religious instincts of mankind. Professor Nor- ton regarded this rejection or undervaluing of the historical miracles as dangerous to the founda- tion of Christianity. He, indeed, deemed the denial of the miracles as equivalent to a denial of the divine origin of Christianity, and as noth- ing more nor less than infidelity, to which he gave the title of " Latest Form," in contradis- tinction to the Deism of the last century of Collins, Toland, etc. As less open and declared it seemed to him only the more insidious and pernicious. Mr. Ripley girded himself to reply with a sort of joyous confidence, like the re- joicing of a strong man to run a race. From his knowledge and appreciation of the views at- tacked, and from his confidence in their truth and strength, as well as from his acquaintance with
the recent theology and philosophy of Germany he was extremely well qualified for the occasion. The controversy turned mainly on the value and importance of miracles as ground and proof of the Christian religion.
Mr. Norton maintained their absolute indis- pensableness, and affirmed that a denial or dis- belief of them was equivalent to a rejection of any proper belief in religion as a divine revela- tion. "Christianity," he says, " claims to reveal facts, a knowledge of which is essential to the moral regeneration of men, and to offer in attes- tation of these facts the only satisfactory proof, - the authority of God evidenced by miraculous displays of his power." Referring to Mr. Rip- ley's views he adds: " The latest form of infi- delity is distinguished by assuming the Christian name while it strikes at the root of faith in Christianity, and indirectly at all religion, by de- nying the miracles attesting the divine mission of Christ." In the course of his discourse he attacked German theology and philosophy ; and first Spinoza, who, though not a German, he says, " is regarded as a profound teacher and patriarch by some of the most noted among the infidel philosophers and theologians of Ger-
3II
PHILOSOPHIC THOUGHT IN BOSTON.
Its chief interest consists in our having in conflict before us representatives of the two different schools of philosophy, - Professor Norton representing that of experience and the senses, in the last resort, as the only source of our knowledge; Mr. Ripley, that which we have called the Intuitional, which regards the mind itself, with its intuitions and cognitions, as an inde- pendent source of knowledge and belief,-which latter, claiming in the past the names of Plato, Descartes, Cudworth, Malebranche, and Berkeley, was destined to exert so wide an influence among us from the works of Col- eridge, Carlyle, Emerson, Hedge, Alcott, Marsh, and others. Though the controversy seems mainly theological and personal, the roots of the posi- tions of the antagonists strike down into the two divergent systems of phi- losophy, and the theological ground rests on the philosophical.1
We pass now to speak of Mr. Ripley's connection with the famous socialistic experiment conducted by the Brook Farm Phalanx. This enterprise was the object of much misapprehension, of a good deal of ridicule and even bitter hostility. It was natural enough that an insti- tution so novel in its arrangements and its claims, so opposed to conser- vative notions and feelings, should encounter prejudice, misapprehension, and ridicule; neither is it strange that many mistakes, and ludicrous ones, should have been made. Embracing in its numbers such heterogeneous materials, and naturally attracting persons of fantastic notions, with vari- ous peculiarities and singularities of character, it was to be expected that some would have vagaries, and some affect singular ways. So the public very
many," and afterward gave an account, in a very unfavorable spirit, of some distinguished recent theologians.
Mr. Ripley in reply controverted Mr. Norton's position that miracles are the only proof of Christianity. After quoting his words, " that the divine authority of him whom God commis- sioned to speak to us in his name was attested in the only mode in which it could be, by mi- raculous displays of his power," and other state- ments to the same effect, he went on to examine this doctrine, and made many citations to show that Mr. Norton's doctrine, though not absolutely novel, was contrary to the opinion and state- ments of many of the most distinguished divines and theologians of Europe and America ; that it was contrary to the teachings of the Old and New Testaments ; and he showed that other proofs, called internal evidence, have ever been admitted to have a force and power that are disparaged by Mr. Norton's claim for miracles as the essential and only satisfactory proof of divine origin. (It should be said, at the same time, that Mr. Nor- ton did not deny to this internal evidence a high comparative value and use.) To the charges made against some distinguished modern Ger- man theologians, and to the severe terms in which Professor Norton had spoken of them as
Pantheists and Infidels, Mr. Ripley replied with an elaborate statement of their belief and philo- sophy, which he substantiated by quotations from their works. He also criticised the translation of passages from them made by Mr. Norton, and charged such versions with incorrectness. To this Mr. Norton replied in a pamphlet criticising and controverting Mr. Ripley's arguments, while he reiterated his own former positions and asser- tions, and adduced citations in confirmation of them. To this Mr. Ripley replied in a second letter, in which he gives an account of the system and doctrines of Spinoza, to refute the common notion of his Atheism, Pantheism, etc., and de- fends some of his own former assertions and translations. This was followed by a third letter by Mr. Ripley, which is specially occupied with a defence of Schleiermacher and De Wette; and this concluded the controversy.
1 In this controversy we believe that it was the general opinion among those who took an interest in the subject, that Mr. Ripley acquitted himself with great credit, both as respects the learning and ability displayed, and the good temper and courtesy shown to his adversary, for whom, as appears from the discriminating notice in the early part of this chapter, he ever retained a high respect.
312
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
legitimately had its laugh. But perhaps it was hardly fair, though natu- ral enough, to fix on these oddities and absurdities as the salient and chief characteristics of the enterprise in which many sensible, thoughtful, worthy, and benevolent persons set themselves seriously to work to carry out an ex- periment which had attractions for themselves, and which they fondly and generously, if not wisely, hoped would lead to important benefit for man- kind. To overlook their humane and generous aims and objects, and what were in many respects their wise, skilful, and efficient arrangements, - to ignore, too, what was really accomplished, and to fix attention only on the mistakes and ludicrous aspects of the enterprise, - was not quite just, nor was it a true view of the matter. The mistakes were necessarily the more obvious features to those outside; often made known, too, from the un- friendly gossip of some who became dissatisfied. The better accomplish- ments could not be so well known without interior acquaintance, or at least sympathy, with the movement. It is, of course, not possible to form any proper estimate of the influence of this experiment, or of what was really accomplished by it. It certainly taught some lessons about associated life, though it may not have demonstrated either its feasibility or the contrary ; but that it had various and important influences in the spirit and direction of the ideas with which it was started, we think many who were there will testify. Some of these look back on it as a very profitable as well as de- lightful part of their lives, and no doubt owe to it-beside valuable practical experience - higher and more generous aims, a free and varied culture, wider sympathies, and more humane views of the relations of society.
The influence on the young, we may perhaps say, was especially valu- able; affording them as it did a wide opportunity for out-of-door life, with its broadening and emancipating effects, combined with instruction from many different teachers of diversified character, and bringing them into daily intimacy with persons of various culture and experience, and with principles of humanity and brotherhood as the basis of daily life. And may we not believe that with all the shortcomings and unfaithfulness to its ideal, with the collisions and heartburnings almost inseparable from asso- ciations of human beings in any enterprise, a large spirit of humanity was developed and prevailed, and that this brief and imperfect experiment had an important influence in enlarging, emphasizing, defining, and deepening the spirit of true democracy?
It would seem that Mr. Ripley was not satisfied with the efficacy of the church modes of administering Christianity, in promoting its objects and combating the evils of the present social arrangements, and was led to hope for more effective benefit to the cause of humanity and for the protection of human brotherhood, from some organization of labor on the principle of co-operation instead of competition, and with agricultural labor as the basis. Questions relating to this matter were discussed between him and some of the leading philanthropists of the day; and these, Dr. Channing among them, took an interest in his ideas, though probably none of them had the
313
PHILOSOPHIC THOUGHT IN BOSTON.
same sanguine hopes. Thus the plan of doing something toward a reform of social organization, by some form of association, gradually took shape in his mind. The subject of Life in Community, or Association, as a remedy for the evils of the present form of social life, seems to have been in the air at the time. The Mendon Association of Adin Ballou and his associates, and perhaps other similar experiments, were in agitation or actually begun. But whatever aid and incitement Mr. Ripley may have owed to the sympathy and thought of others, we may assert that this enterprise derived its origin from his philanthropic idealism, and that to him belongs the credit of hav- ing given form to the scheme as actually carried out, and of having devised and fixed upon the ways and means of its inception and realization.1
This movement, in the mind of Mr. Ripley and others, was one form of . the strong and rising feeling of humanity and of the brotherhood of man, then so widely pervading the community. With it, too, came the desire and hope for better conditions of life, in which the less fortunate classes might come to share in the privileges, comforts, and various advantages belonging to civilized society.
The feeling which at this time manifested itself in an excited form in the Antislavery agitation may indirectly have had some effect in suggesting or stimulating this movement. Mr. Ripley, and others with him, while sym- pathizing with the object of the Abolitionists, thought that as the evils of which slavery is so signal and conspicuous a form lay deep in the present constitution and arrangement of society, so their remedy could only be found in a modification or radical change of ordinary life. The feeling, then, which lay at the bottom of the Brook Farm enterprise, and from which it mainly sprang, we may say, from acquaintance with many of its chief actors and friends, was dissatisfaction with the existing conditions of society, - that, under these, some classes enjoy the advantages of high culture and the gratification of the intellect and taste, and if obliged to work in some way for subsistence they yet have leisure and opportunity for refined recreation and for the enjoyment of comfortable or elegant modes of living, and are in some respects subject to more favorable moral influences; while under these, also, other classes are doomed to wearisome or painful drudgery and incessant toil, without opportunity for the enjoyments of intellect and taste, confined to dreary and squalid conditions of existence, and more exposed to temptations at least to the more flagrant crimes. Then, again, there was the feeling that there is something wrong in the mode of industry as now constituted, - namely, competitive industry ; a point so much insisted on by Fourier and other advocates of association, in which one man's gain is
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.