Youwillreadilyadmitthatnodescriptionofthephenomenaofthereligiousconsciousnesscouldbebetterthanthesewordsofyourlamentedpreacherandphilosopher。Theyreproducetheveryraptureofthosecrisesofconversionofwhichwehavebeenhearing；theyutterwhatthemysticfeltbutwasunabletocommunicate；andthesaint，inhearingthem，recognizeshisownexperience。Itisindeedgratifyingtofindthecontentofreligionreportedsounanimously。Butwhenallissaidanddone，hasPrincipalCaird——andIonlyusehimasanexampleofthatwholemodeofthinking——transcendedthesphereoffeelingandofthedirectexperienceoftheindividual，andlaidthefoundationsofreligioninimpartialreason？Hashemadereligionuniversalbycoercivereasoning，transformeditfromaprivatefaithintoapubliccertainty？Hasherescueditsaffirmationsfromobscurityandmystery？
Ibelievethathehasdonenothingofthekind，butthathehassimplyreaffirmedtheindividual’sexperiencesinamoregeneralizedvocabulary。Andagain，Icanbeexcusedfromprovingtechnicallythatthetranscendentalistreasoningsfailtomakereligionuniversal，forIcanpointtotheplainfactthatamajorityofscholars，evenreligiouslydisposedones，stubbornlyrefusetotreatthemasconvincing。ThewholeofGermany，onemaysay，haspositivelyrejectedtheHegelianargumentation。AsforScotland，IneedonlymentionProfessorFraser’sandProfessorPringle-Pattison’smemorablecriticisms，withwhichsomanyofyouarefamiliar。[300]Oncemore，Iask，iftranscendentalidealismwereasobjectivelyandabsolutelyrationalasitpretendstobe，coulditpossiblyfailsoegregiouslytobepersuasive？
[300]A。C。Fraser：PhilosophyofTheism，secondedition，EdinburghandLondon，1899，especiallypartii，chaps。vii。andviii。A。Seth[Pringle-Pattison]：HegelianismandPersonality，Ibid。，1890，passim。
ThemostpersuasiveargumentsinfavorofaconcreteindividualSouloftheworld，withwhichIamacquainted，arethoseofmycolleague，JosiahRoyce，inhisReligiousAspectofPhilosophy，Boston，1885；inhisConceptionofGod，NewYorkandLondon，1897；andlatelyinhisAberdeenGiffordLectures，TheWorldandtheIndividual，2vols。，NewYorkandLondon，1901-02。I
doubtlessseemtosomeofmyreaderstoevadethephilosophicdutywhichmythesisinthislectureimposesonme，bynotevenattemptingtomeetProfessorRoyce’sargumentsarticulately。I
admitthemomentaryevasion。Inthepresentlectures，whicharecastthroughoutinapopularmould，thereseemednoroomforsubtlemetaphysicaldiscussion，andfortacticalpurposesitwassufficientthecontentionofphilosophybeingwhatitisnamely，thatreligioncanbetransformedintoauniversallyconvincingscience，topointtothefactthatnoreligiousphilosophyhasactuallyconvincedthemassofthinkers。MeanwhileletmesaythatIhopethatthepresentvolumemaybefollowedbyanother，ifIamsparedtowriteit，inwhichnotonlyProfessorRoyce’sarguments，butothersformonisticabsolutismshallbeconsideredwithallthetechnicalfullnesswhichtheirgreatimportancecallsfor。AtpresentIresignmyselftolyingpassiveunderthereproachofsuperficiality。
Whatreligionreports，youmustremember，alwayspurportstobeafactofexperience：thedivineisactuallypresent，religionsays，andbetweenitandourselvesrelationsofgiveandtakeareactual。Ifdefiniteperceptionsoffactlikethiscannotstandupontheirownfeet，surelyabstractreasoningcannotgivethemthesupporttheyareinneedof。Conceptualprocessescanclassfacts，definethem，interpretthem；buttheydonotproducethem，norcantheyreproducetheirindividuality。ThereisalwaysaPLUS，aTHISNESS，whichfeelingalonecananswerfor。Philosophyinthissphereisthusasecondaryfunction，unabletowarrantfaith’sveracity，andsoIreverttothethesiswhichIannouncedatthebeginningofthislecture。
InallsadsincerityIthinkwemustconcludethattheattempttodemonstratebypurelyintellectualprocessesthetruthofthedeliverancesofdirectreligiousexperienceisabsolutelyhopeless。
Itwouldbeunfairtophilosophy，however，toleaveherunderthisnegativesentence。Letmeclose，then，bybrieflyenumeratingwhatsheCANdoforreligion。Ifshewillabandonmetaphysicsanddeductionforcriticismandinduction，andfranklytransformherselffromtheologyintoscienceofreligions，shecanmakeherselfenormouslyuseful。
Thespontaneousintellectofmanalwaysdefinesthedivinewhichitfeelsinwaysthatharmonizewithitstemporaryintellectualprepossessions。Philosophycanbycomparisoneliminatethelocalandtheaccidentalfromthesedefinitions。Bothfromdogmaandfromworshipshecanremovehistoricincrustations。Byconfrontingthespontaneousreligiousconstructionswiththeresultsofnaturalscience，philosophycanalsoeliminatedoctrinesthatarenowknowntobescientificallyabsurdorincongruous。
Siftingoutinthiswayunworthyformulations，shecanleavearesiduumofconceptionsthatatleastarepossible。WiththeseshecandealasHYPOTHESES，testingtheminallthemanners，whethernegativeorpositive，bywhichhypothesesareevertested。Shecanreducetheirnumber，assomearefoundmoreopentoobjection。Shecanperhapsbecomethechampionofonewhichshepicksoutasbeingthemostcloselyverifiedorverifiable。
Shecanrefineuponthedefinitionofthishypothesis，distinguishingbetweenwhatisinnocentover-beliefandsymbolismintheexpressionofit，andwhatistobeliterallytaken。Asaresult，shecanoffermediationbetweendifferentbelievers，andhelptobringaboutconsensusofopinion。Shecandothisthemoresuccessfully，thebettershediscriminatesthecommonandessentialfromtheindividualandlocalelementsofthereligiousbeliefswhichshecompares。
IdonotseewhyacriticalScienceofReligionsofthissortmightnoteventuallycommandasgeneralapublicadhesionasiscommandedbyaphysicalscience。Eventhepersonallynon-religiousmightacceptitsconclusionsontrust，muchasblindpersonsnowacceptthefactsofoptics——itmightappearasfoolishtorefusethem。Yetasthescienceofopticshastobefedinthefirstinstance，andcontinuallyverifiedlater，byfactsexperiencedbyseeingpersons；sothescienceofreligionswoulddependforitsoriginalmaterialonfactsofpersonalexperience，andwouldhavetosquareitselfwithpersonalexperiencethroughallitscriticalreconstructions。Itcouldnevergetawayfromconcretelife，orworkinaconceptualvacuum。Itwouldforeverhavetoconfess，aseveryscienceconfesses，thatthesubtletyofnaturefliesbeyondit，andthatitsformulasarebutapproximations。Philosophylivesinwords，buttruthandfactwellupintoourlivesinwaysthatexceedverbalformulation。Thereisinthelivingactofperceptionalwayssomethingthatglimmersandtwinklesandwillnotbecaught，andforwhichreflectioncomestoolate。Nooneknowsthisaswellasthephilosopher。Hemustfirehisvolleyofnewvocablesoutofhisconceptualshotgun，forhisprofessioncondemnshimtothisindustry，buthesecretlyknowsthehollownessandirrelevancy。Hisformulasarelikestereoscopicorkinetoscopicphotographsseenoutsidetheinstrument；theylackthedepth，themotion，thevitality。Inthereligioussphere，inparticular，beliefthatformulasaretruecanneverwhollytaketheplaceofpersonalexperience。
InmynextlectureIwilltrytocompletemyroughdescriptionofreligiousexperience；andinthelectureafterthat，whichisthelastone，Iwilltrymyhandatformulatingconceptuallythetruthtowhichitisawitness。
Wehavewoundourwayback，afterourexcursionthroughmysticismandphilosophy，towherewewerebefore：theusesofreligion，itsusestotheindividualwhohasit，andtheusesoftheindividualhimselftotheworld，arethebestargumentsthattruthisinit。Wereturntotheempiricalphilosophy：thetrueiswhatworkswell，eventhoughthequalification“onthewhole“
mayalwayshavetobeadded。Inthislecturewemustreverttodescriptionagain，andfinishourpictureofthereligiousconsciousnessbyawordaboutsomeofitsothercharacteristicelements。Then，inafinallecture，weshallbefreetomakeageneralreviewanddrawourindependentconclusions。
ThefirstpointIwillspeakofisthepartwhichtheaestheticlifeplaysindeterminingone’schoiceofareligion。Men，I
saidawhileago，involuntarilyintellectualizetheirreligiousexperience。Theyneedformulas，justastheyneedfellowshipinworship。Ispoke，therefore，toocontemptuouslyofthepragmaticuselessnessofthefamousscholasticlistofattributesofthedeity，fortheyhaveoneusewhichIneglectedtoconsider。TheeloquentpassageinwhichNewmanenumeratesthem[301]putsusonthetrackofit。Intoningthemashewouldintoneacathedralservice，heshowshowhighistheiraestheticvalue。Itenrichesourbarepietytocarrytheseexaltedandmysteriousverbaladditionsjustasitenrichesachurchtohaveanorganandoldbrasses，marblesandfrescoesandstainedwindows。Epithetslendanatmosphereandovertonestoourdevotion。Theyarelikeahymnofpraiseandserviceofglory，andmaysoundthemoresublimeforbeingincomprehensible。MindslikeNewman’s[302]
growasjealousoftheircreditasheathenpriestsareofthatofthejewelryandornamentsthatblazeupontheiridols。
[301]IdeaofaUniversity，DiscourseIII。Section7。
[302]Newman’simaginationsoinnatelycravedanecclesiasticalsystemthathecanwrite：“Fromtheageoffifteen，dogmahasbeenthefundamentalprincipleofmyreligion：Iknownootherreligion；Icannotenterintotheideaofanyothersortofreligion。”Andagainspeakingofhimselfabouttheageofthirty，hewrites：“IlovedtoactasfeelingmyselfinmyBishop’ssight，asifitwerethesightofGod。”Apologia，1897，pp。48，50。
Amongthebuildings-outofreligionwhichthemindspontaneouslyindulgesin，theaestheticmotivemustneverbeforgotten。I
promisedtosaynothingofecclesiasticalsystemsintheselectures。Imaybeallowed，however，toputinawordatthispointonthewayinwhichtheirsatisfactionofcertainaestheticneedscontributestotheirholdonhumannature。Althoughsomepersonsaimmostatintellectualpurityandsimplification，forothersRICHNESSisthesupremeimaginativerequirement。[303]Whenone’smindisstronglyofthistype，anindividualreligionwillhardlyservethepurpose。Theinnerneedisratherofsomethinginstitutionalandcomplex，majesticinthehierarchicinterrelatednessofitsparts，withauthoritydescendingfromstagetostage，andateverystageobjectsforadjectivesofmysteryandsplendor，derivedinthelastresortfromtheGodheadwhoisthefountainandculminationofthesystem。Onefeelsthenasifinpresenceofsomevastincrustedworkofjewelryorarchitecture；onehearsthemultitudinousliturgicalappeal；onegetsthehonorificvibrationcomingfromeveryquarter。Comparedwithsuchanoblecomplexity，inwhichascendinganddescendingmovementsseeminnowaytojaruponstability，inwhichnosingleitem，howeverhumble，isinsignificant，becausesomanyaugustinstitutionsholditinitsplace，howflatdoesevangelicalProtestantismappear，howbaretheatmosphereofthoseisolatedreligiousliveswhoseboastitisthat“maninthebushwithGodmaymeet。”[304]Whatapulverizationandlevelingofwhatagloriouslypiled-upstructure！Toanimaginationusedtotheperspectivesofdignityandglory，thenakedgospelschemeseemstoofferanalmshouseforapalace。
[303]Theintellectualdifferenceisquiteonaparinpracticalimportancewiththeanalogousdifferenceincharacter。Wesaw，undertheheadofSaintliness，howsomecharactersresentconfusionandmustliveinpurity，consistency，simplicityabove，p。275ff。。Forothers，onthecontrary，superabundance，over-pressure，stimulation，lotsofsuperficialrelations，areindispensable。Therearemenwhowouldsufferaverysyncopeifyoushouldpayalltheirdebts，bringitaboutthattheirengagementshadbeenkept，theirlettersansweredtheirperplexitiesrelieved，andtheirdutiesfulfilled，downtoonewhichlayonacleantableundertheireyeswithnothingtointerferewithitsimmediateperformance。Adaystrippedsostaringlybarewouldbeforthemappalling。Sowithease，elegance，tributesofaffection，socialrecognitions——someofusrequireamountsofthesethingswhichtootherswouldappearamassoflyingandsophistication。
[304]InNewman’sLecturesonJustificationLectureVIII。
Section6，thereisasplendidpassageexpressiveofthisaestheticwayoffeelingtheChristianscheme。Itisunfortunatelytoolongtoquote。
Itismuchlikethepatrioticsentimentofthosebroughtupinancientempires。Howmanyemotionsmustbefrustratedoftheirobject，whenonegivesupthetitlesofdignity，thecrimsonlightsandblareofbrass，thegoldembroidery，theplumedtroops，thefearandtrembling，andputsupwithapresidentinablackcoatwhoshakeshandswithyou，andcomes，itmaybe，froma“home“uponaveldtorprairiewithonesitting-roomandaBibleonitscentre-table。Itpauperizesthemonarchicalimagination！