PYRRHONISM AND MAHOMETANISM.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XX, Issue 3934, 16 June 1877, Page 2

PYRRHONISM AND MAHOMETANISM.

Sik, — It does not require a ie Thinking Machine" to enable men of ordinary intelligence to see that the above two isms are tho arms of a lever now at work here to give a lift to Christianity. And, as in mechanics, both arms belong to one and the same lever, so, I believe, is it the case here. I will consider the magnitude and direction of both forces. And, first, 1 will deal with " Enquirer," whom I regard as the less force, I consider him very little indeed. To call him manly would be a prostitution of that attributive ' t to style" him an evasive sneak would be giving him loss than his due. 1 charged him in my letter with having, in cold blood, sat down and written a wilful fabrication, the object of which was to lower me, if ho could, in the eyes of the ignorant; and instead of apologising, and frankly acknowledging the wrong, he writes another anonymous production, ignoring his whole behaviour, and exhibiting as much spleen as his little spirit is capable of. He says, " I do not for a moment doubt the literal accuracy of Mr Irvine's statement." I, on the other hand, not only doubt his statement, but I reiterate that he has been guilty of the grossest and most wanton untruth ; and I will, moreover, tell liim that if I knew who he was, I would be disj)oßccl, with whip in hand, to let him know that I am a muscular Christian, and belong to the Church Militant. However, a moral whipping is in some cases a more dignified and telling retribution. It is much easier, sir, to talk and write about philosophers than to be acquainted with philosophy. Your correspondent does not seem to know much of philosophy, history, or logic. He has hunted up several books, and he finds that the Pyrrhonists were the disciples of a philosopher named Pyrrho, who lived several centuries before Christ. Pyrrho lived less than three centures before Christ — and two cannot be said to be several — of and what was his philosophy ? A system universal distrust both of men and truths, so that he was a sceptic in philosophy, and a satirist in everything. And let me tell "Enquirer" that through the succeeding centuries the term Pyrrhonist was given to all who belonged to schools of scepticism and infidelity. - According to " Enquirer " there cannot be a modern Pyrrhonist, a modern sceptic. There are no doubters in the 19th century. Alas ! their name is " legion," for they are many. I suppose if I were to call " Enquirer " a Judas, he would sneer at my folly, seeing that the traitor lived more than 1800 years ago. Perhaps he would prefer my calling him a Demosthenes, a Shakespeare, or perhaps a Hercules, if he too be a muscular Christian, of which I have my doubts. Pyrrho stands prominently out as the type of a class which has not yet become extinct, and will not, to the end of time, become extinct, for "when the Son of Man cometh, shall He find Faith on the earth?" The fallacy into which "Enquirer " has fallen is that of in dietione. I did not say in my " Article," as he calls it, that Pyrrho, or any sceptic attending Pyrrho's school, disbelieved in the doctrines and truths of Christianity. Such a statement would have been simply absurd. What I said was : " The Pyrrhonist is the man who doubts the existence of God, the existence of a devil, the existence of Heaven, and the existence of Hell," meaning of course the modern Sceptic, the infidel of the " present day," the bold and daring Pyrrhonist of the nineteenth century. And now for the other arm of the lever — the stronger arm, inasmuch as it is nerved and supported by the Pull Mall Gazette. But who cares for the Pall Mall Gazette \ Judging from the article, I should say the Editor was more of a Mahometan than a Christian. There is a large portion of the Press under the chastening power and rectifying principles of revelation, for which the deepest gratitude ought to be felt ; and when I add to this the admission, that to the Press, in its general conduct, are immensely indebted our liberties and laws, our institutions, and domestic habitudes, and social refinements, it will not be asserted I libel its general character, or deny its claims on the moral respect of every enlightened mind. But, on the other hand, I charge a certain portion of the Press with directly or indirectly opposing the Revealed Mind of God touching the dark realities of human nature, as they unfold their actings before Him, as the Supreme law — giver of the world. Deny it who list — the hour is fast coming, when the Press must be baptised into the service of revealed truth, become Christian, and act under the inspiration of a Godrealising conscience — or else, it will prostitute its influence, by corrupting spiritual faith, sectarianising the Church, and disorganising a deluded world. No wonder that the wretched Christianity of the East should have brought the Gospel into contempt, and cleared the way for Islamism. Whoever considers the degraded and distracted state of the Christian religion at the time when Mahomet first proclaimed his doctrines, cannot avoid seeing that an opportunity was thereby given for the introduction of any superstition which might have been proposed. Christianity existed only in name. Legends, fables, sophisms, and subleties constitiited the doctrines of the Eastern as well as of the Western Church, and the believers of the Gospel were distinguished more by their vices than by their virtues. The necessary consequence of this miserable state of religion was the contempt of the Gospel, and an arbitrary faith, which was varied according to the fancy of each individual. Under these circumstances, there can be no surprise at the success which attended Mahometanism. But the rapid propagation of opinions is not a test of truth in any case, unless it should possess some other evidence. It is by reason and due enquiry, rather than by numbers, that tho reality of revelation is ascertained. The morality of Mahomet was a selection of some of those Scriptural rules which Jews, Christians, and idolaters might equally respect, and in those points wherein lie differed from them, he Avas supported by the overpowering advocacy of the passions. In acknowledging the authority of Moses and of Christ, and in saying that lie was only sent to restore their religion and reform the world, his mission appeared to many to bo worthy of their acceptance. But all his success was caused by human prejudices and by human means, and totally dissimilar to the progress of Christianity. From an intimate knowledge of the whole system, I aver that it is unreasonable to institute any analogy between Christianity and Mahometanism. The two religions differ from each other in the mode of their propagation, in tho nature of their creeds, in the evidence which supports them, and in the characters of their founders. As the purity of Christ bore witness to His divine mission, so was the viciousness of Mahomet a refutation of his claims. Except in the instance of intoxicating liquors (for which there is little desire in warm countries) he authorised the most unbounded indulgence of passion. Not knowing anything about Maori morality, 1 cannot say whether this would recommend the system to them or not. There arc, however, many stories in the Koran that I think would amuse them immensely. One is that the prophet had a nocturnal visit to heaven upon an ass, led by the angel Gabriel. On their arrival at heaven, he knocked at the door, which the purler opened. Soon after he had been announced he Avas received with great cordiality by a decrcpid old man, which proved to be Adam. He particularly admired a large while cock which was standing" among other birds and beasts. He was also amazed at the taste-

fill manner in wh''ch the celestial ornaments were disposed, Heaven itself being made of silver, the stars elegantly hung by chains of gold, and each star about the size of Nebo. — I am, Sir, in ■ haste, G. M. D'Arcy Irvine, M.A., [ HeadM aster of the Grammar : School. Napier, June 15, 1877.