Least of all, do I understand the claims made in behalf of this department to supply the spiritual void in case the old theology is no longer accredited.  When one looks closely at the stream and tendency of thought, one sees a growing alliance and kinship between religion and poetry or art.  There is, as we know, a dogmatic, precise, severe, logical side of theology, by which creeds are constructed, religious tests imposed, and belief made a matter of legal compulsion.  There is also a sentimental, ideal, imaginative side that resists definition, that refuses dogmatic prescription, and seeks only to satisfy spiritual needs and emotions.  Metaphysics may no doubt take a part in the dogmatic or doctrinal treatment, but it must qualify itself by biblical study, and become altogether theology.  In the other aspect, metaphysics, as I conceive it, is unavailing; the poet is the proper medium for keeping up the emotional side, under all transformations of doctrinal belief.  But as conceived by others, metaphysics is philosophy and poetry in one, to which I can never agree.  The combination of the two, as hitherto exhibited, has been made at the expense of both.  The leading terms of philosophy—­reason, spirit, soul, the ideal, the infinite, the absolute, phenomenal truth, being, consciousness—­are lubricated with emotion, and thrown together in ways that defy the understanding.  The unintelligible, which ought to be the shame of philosophy, is made its glory.

These remarks prepare for the conclusion that I arrive at as to the scope of metaphysics with reference to the higher questions.  That it has bearings upon these questions I allow; and those bearings are legitimately within the range of metaphysical debates.  But I make a wide distinction between metaphysical discussion and theological discussion; and do not consider that they can be combined to advantage.  In the great latitude of free inquiry in the present day, theology is freely canvassed, and societies might be properly devoted to that express object; but I cannot see any benefit that would arise by a philosophical society undertaking, in addition to its own province, to raise the questions belonging to theology.  I am well aware that there is one society of very distinguished persons in the metropolis, calling itself metaphysical, that freely ventures upon the perilous seas of theological debate.[14] No doubt good comes from any exercise of the liberty of discussion, so long restrained in this region; yet, I can hardly suppose that purely metaphysical, studies can thrive in such a connection.  Many of the members must think far more of the theological issues than of the cultivation of mental and logical science; and a purely metaphysical debate can seldom be pursued with profit under these conditions.

* * * * *

[POLEMICS IN GREECE.]