握握弌傍利 > 凪麿窮徨慕 > alexandria and her schools(冉煽表寄才慢議僥丕) >

及16嫗

alexandria and her schools(冉煽表寄才慢議僥丕)-及16嫗

弌傍�� alexandria and her schools(冉煽表寄才慢議僥丕) 忖方�� 耽匈3500忖

梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��






that George  Fox   the  Quaker�察 �or the  author  of the  ;Deutsche Theologie�察─�

did so。     They may have gone to Hindoo philosophy�察�or rather�察�to second 

and third hand traditions thereof�察�for corroborations of the belief�察�but be 

sure�察 �it   must   have   existed   in   their own   hearts   first�察�or   they  would   never 

have   gone   thither。      Believe   it�察  �be   sure   of   it。  No   earnest   thinker   is   a 

plagiarist pure and simple。           He will never borrow from others that which 

he has not already�察�more or less�察�thought out for himself。                      When once a 

great idea�察�instinctive�察�inductive ��for the two expressions are nearer akin 

than   most   fancy���察  �has   dawned   on   his   soul�察  �he   will   welcome   lovingly�察�

awfully�察     �any    corroboration      from     foreign    schools�察    �and    cry   with    joy�此�

;Behold�察  �this   is   not   altogether   a   dream�此     �for   others   have   found   it   also。 

Surely it must be real�察�universal�察�eternal。;               No�察�be sure there is far more 

originality   ��in   the   common   sense   of   the   word���察  �and   far   less   ��in   the   true 

sense   of   the   word���察  �than   we   fancy�察  �and   that   it   is   a   paltry   and   shallow 

doctrine which   represents   each succeeding school   as   merely  the   puppets 

and dupes of the preceding。             More originality�察�because each earnest man 

seems   to   think   out   for   himself   the   deepest   grounds   of   his   creed。      Less 

originality�察    �because�察    �as  I  believe�察   �one   common       Logos�察    �Word�察   �Reason�察�

reveals and unveils the same eternal truth to all who seek and hunger for 

it。 

     Therefore   we   can�察  �as   the   Christian   philosophers   of   Alexandria   did�察�

rejoice     over   every    truth    which    their   heathen     adversaries      beheld�察   �and 

attribute them�察�as Clement does�察�to the highest source�察�to the inspiration of 

the one and universal Logos。              With Clement�察�philosophy is only hurtful 

when      it  is   untrue    to   itself�察 �and    philosophy       falsely    so   called�察   �true 

philosophy is an image of the truth�察�a divine gift bestowed on the Greeks。 

The Bible�察�in his eyes�察�asserts that all forms of art and wisdom are from 

God。      The   wise   in   mind   have   no   doubt   some   peculiar   endowment   of 

nature�察�but when they have offered themselves for their work�察�they receive 

a spirit of perception from the Highest Wisdom�察�giving them a new fitness 

for it。    All severe study�察�all cultivation of sympathy�察�are exercises of this 

spiritual   endowment。          The   whole   intellectual   discipline   of   the   Greeks�察�

with   their   philosophy�察  �came   down   from   God   to   men。             Philosophy�察  �he 

concludes in   one   place�察  �carries   on   ;an   inquiry  concerning Truth   and   the 



                                                  59 


´ Page 60´

                            ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS 



nature of Being�察�and this Truth is that concerning which the Lord Himself 

said�此   �'I am the Truth。'      And when the initiated find�察�or rather receive�察�the 

true philosophy�察�they have it from the Truth itself�察�that is from Him who is 

true。; 

     While�察  �then�察  �these   two   schools   had   so   many   grounds   in       common�察�

where was their point of divergence�拭              �We shall   find it�察 �I believe�察 �fairly 

expressed in the dying words of Plotinus�察�the great father of Neoplatonism。 

;I am striving to bring the God which is in us into harmony with the God 

which is in the universe。;         Whether or not Plotinus actually so spoke�察�that 

was what his disciples not only said that he spoke�察�but what they would 

have wished him to speak。           That one sentence expresses the whole object 

of their philosophy。 

     But   to   that   Pantaenus�察  �Origen�察  �Clement�察  �and   Augustine   would   have 

answered�此       �And we�察�on the other hand�察�assert that the God which is in 

the  universe�察  �is   the  same   as   the   God   which   is   in   you�察  �and   is   striving   to 

bring you into harmony with Himself。;               There is the experimentum crucis。 

There   is   the   vast   gulf   between   the   Christian   and   the   Heathen   schools�察�

which when any man had overleaped�察�the whole problem of the universe 

was   from   that   moment   inverted。       With   Plotinus   and   his   school   man   is 

seeking for God�此        �with Clement and his�察�God is seeking for man。                 With 

the former�察�God is passive�察�and man active�此             �with the latter�察�God is active�察�

man is passivepassive�察�that is�察�in so far as his business is to listen when 

he is spoken to�察�to look at the light which is unveiled to him�察�to submit 

himself to the inward laws which he feels reproving and checking him at 

every turn�察�as Socrates was reproved and checked by his inward Daemon。 

     Whether of these two theorems gives the higher conception either of 

the  Divine  Being�察 �or   of  man�察 �I  leave  it   for  you   to   judge。    To   those  old 

Alexandrian   Christians�察  �a   being   who   was   not   seeking   after   every   single 

creature�察    �and   trying   to  raise   him�察  �could    not   be  a  Being     of  absolute 

Righteousness�察  �Power�察  �Love�察  �could   not   be   a   Being   worthy  of   respect   or 

admiration�察  �even   of   philosophic   speculation。        Human   righteousness   and 

love   flows   forth   disinterestedly   to   all   around   it�察  �however   unconscious�察�

however unworthy they may be�察�human power associated with goodness�察�

seeks for objects which it may raise and benefit by that power。                   We must 



                                                60 


´ Page 61´

                            ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS 



confess this�察�with the Christian schools�察�or�察�with the Heathen schools�察�we 

must allow another theory�察�which brought them into awful depths�察�which 

may bring any generation which holds it into the same depths。 

     If Clement had asked the Neoplatonists�此              �You believe�察�Plotinus�察�in an 

absolutely Good Being。           Do you believe that it desires to shed forth its 

goodness   on   all�拭─     �Of   course�察─  �they   would   have   answered�察   �on   those 

who seek for it�察�on the philosopher。; 

     ;But   not�察  �it   seems�察  �Plotinus�察  �on   the   herd�察  �the   brutal�察  �ignorant   mass�察�

wallowing   in   those   foul   crimes   above   which   you   have   risen�拭─      �And   at 

that question there would have been not a little hesitation。                 These brutes 

in human form�察�these souls wallowing in earthly mire�察�could hardly�察�in the 

Neoplatonists' eyes�察�be objects of the Divine desire。 

     ;Then this Absolute Good�察�you say�察�Plotinus�察�has no relation with them�察�

no   care   to   raise   them。  In   fact�察  �it   cannot   raise   them�察  �because   they   have 

nothing      in   common       with    it。    Is    that   your    notion�拭─      �And      the 

Neoplatonists would have�察�on the whole�察�allowed that argument。                       And if 

Clement had answered�察�that such was not his notion of Goodness�察�or of a 

Good   Being�察  �and   that   therefore   the   goodness   of   their   Absolute   Good�察�

careless of the degradation and misery around it�察�must be something very 

different   from   his   notions   of   human   goodness�察  �the   Neoplatonists   would 

have     answered     indeed    they   did   answer;After      all�察 �why    not�拭  �Why 

should   the   Absolute   Goodness   be   like   our   human   goodness�拭─          �This   is 

Plotinus's own belief。 It is a question with him�察�it was still more a question 

with those who came after him�察�whether virtues could be predicated of the 

Divine nature�察�courage�察�for instance�察�of one who had nothing to fear�察�self´ 

restraint�察  �of   one   who   had   nothing   to   desire。  And   thus�察  �by  setting   up   a 

different standard of morality for the divine and for the human�察�Plotinus 

gradually   arrives   at   the   conclusion�察  �that   virtue   is   not   the   end�察  �but   the 

means�察�not the Divine nature itself�察�as the Christian schools held�察�but only 

the purgative process by which man was to ascend into heaven�察�and which 

was necessary to arrive at that naturethat nature itself beingwhat�拭�

     And how to answer that last question was the abysmal problem of the 

whole of Neoplatonic philosophy�察�in searching for which it wearied itself 

out�察   �generation     after  generation�察    �till  tired  equally    of  seeking     and   of 



                                                61 


´ Page 62´

                             ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS 



speaking�察  �it   fairly   lay   down   and   died。      In   proportion     as   it   refused   to 

acknowledge a common divine nature with the degraded mass�察�it deserted 

its first healthy instinct�察�which told it that the spiritual world is identical 

with     the  moral     world�察   �with   right�察  �love�察  �justice�察  �it  tried  to   find   new 

definitions      for  the   spiritual�察  �it  conceived      it  to  be   identical   with    the 

intellectual。      That     did   not  satisfy    its  heart。    It  had    to  repeople     the 

spiritual world�察�which it had emptied of its proper denizens�察�with ghosts�察�

to    reinvent    the   old   daemonologies         and   polytheismsfrom         thence    to 

descend into lower depths�察�of which we will speak hereafter。 

     But   in   the   meanwhile   we   must   look   at   another   quarrel   which   arose 

between the two twin schools of Alexandria。                  The Neoplatonists said that 

there   is   a   divine   element   in   man。   The   Christian   philosophers   assented 

fervently�察�and raised the old disagreeable question�此                  �Is it in every man�拭�

In the publicans and harlots as well as in the philosophers�拭                 �We say that it 

is。;    And   there   again   the   Neoplatonist   finds   it   over   hard   to   assent   to   a 

doctrine�察�equally contrary to outward appearance�察�and galling to Pharisaic 

pride�察    �and    enters    into    a   hundred      honest     self´   puzzles     and    self´ 

contradictions�察�which seem to justify him at last in saying�察�No。                       It is in 

the philosopher�察�who is ready by nature�察�as Plotinus has it�察�and as it were 

furnished with wings�察�and not needing to sever himself from  matter like 

the rest�察�but disposed already to ascend to that which is above。                     And in a 

degree too�察�it is in the ;lover�察─�who�察�according to Plotinus�察�has a certain 

innate recollection of beauty�察�and hovers round it�察�and desires it�察�wherever 

he sees it。     Him you may raise to the apprehension of the one incorporeal 

Beauty�察  �by   teaching   him   to   separate   beauty   from   the   various   o

卦指朕村 貧匯匈 和匯匈 指欺競何 壘��1�� 家��2��

低辛嬬浪散議