Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 7.djvu/840

 INDIFFERENTISM

760

INDIFFERENTISM

of the living Church they substituted for it that of the Bible. But their rule of faith was the Bible, inter- preted by private judgment. This doctrine intro- duced the principle of Rationalism into the very structure of Protestantism. The history of that movement is a record of continually increasing divi- sions, multiplications of sects, with a steady tendency to reduce the contents of a fixed dogmatic creed. In a few words Cardinal Newman has summed up the lesson of that history: "Experience proves surely that the Bible does not answer a purpose for which it w'as never intended. It may be accidentally the means of converting individuals; but a book after all cannot make a stand against the wild living intellect of man, and in this day it begins to testify, as regards its own structure and contents, to the power of that universal solvent which is so successfully acting upon religious establishments" (Apologia pro Vita Sua, London, 1883, v, 245). As divisions increased in the gen- eral body of Protestantism, and as domestic dissen- sions arose in the bosom of particular denominations, some of the leaders endeavoured to find a principle of harmony in the theory that the essential doctrines of Christianity are summed up in a few great, simple truths which are clearly expressed in Scripture, and that, consequently, whoever believes these and regu- lates his life accordingly is a true follower of Christ. This movement failed to stay the process of disintegra- tion, and powerfully promoted the opinion that, pro- vided one accepts Christianity as the true religion, it makes httle difference to what particular denomina- tion one adheres. The view spread that there is no creed definitely .set forth in Scripture, therefore all are of equal value, and all profitable to salvation. Large numbers in the Church of England adopted this opinion, which came to be known as Liberalism or Latitudinarianism. It was not, however, confined to one form of Protestantism, but obtained adherents in almost every body inheriting from the Reformation. The effort was made to reconcile it with the official confessions by introducing the policy of permitting every one to interpret the compulsory formula; in his own sense.

Indifferentism, liberal and infidel, has been vigor- ously promoted during the past half century by the dominance of Rationalism in all the lines of scientific inquiry which touch upon religion. The theory of evolution applied to the origin of man, Biblical criti- cism of the Old and the New Testament, the compara- tive study of religions, arclireology, and ethnology, in the hands of men who assume as their primary postu- late that there is no supernatural, and that all religions, Christianity included, are b>it the offspring of the feel- ing and thought of the natural man, have propagated a general atmosphere of iloulit or positive unbelief. As a result, large mmibers of Protestants have abandoned all distinctly Christian belief, while others, still cling- ing to the name, have emptied their creed of all its essential dogmatic contents. The doctrine of Scrip- tural inspiration and inerrancy is all but universally abandoned. It would not, perhaps, be incorrect to say that the prevalent view to-day is that Christ taught no dogmatic doctrine. His teaching was purely ethical, and its only permanent and valuable content is summed up in the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. When this point is reached the Indifferentism which arose in belief joins hands with the Indifferentism of infidelity. The latter substitutes for religion, the former ad\ocates as the only essential of religion, the broad fundamental principles of nat- ural morality, such as justice, veracity, and benevo- lence that takes concrete form in social service. In some minds this theory of life is combined with. Agnos- ticism, in others with a vague Theism, while in many it is still united with some vestiges of Christian Faith.

Along with the intellectual cause just noted, an- other has been what one might call the automatic

influence proceeding from the existence of many reli- gions side by side in the same country. This condi- tion has given rise to the political indifferentism referred to in the opening of this article, \\here this state of affairs prevails, when men of various creeds meet one another in political, commercial, and social life, in order that they may carry on their relations harmoniously they will not demand any special recog- nition of their own respective denominations. Per- sonal intercourse fosters the spirit of tolerance, and whoever does not unflinchingly hold to the truth that there is but one true religion is apt to be guided in his judgments by the maxim, "From their fruits ye shall know them. " On observing that probity and good intention mark the lives of some of his associates who differ in their religious beliefs, he may easily come to the conclusion that one religion is as good as another. Probably, however, many who speak thus would acknowledge the fallacy of this view if pushed Ijj' argu- ment. On the other hand, great numbers of theoreti- cal Indifferentists display unmistakalale hostility to the Catholic Church; while, again, persons devoid of all religious belief, favour the Church as an efficient element of police for t he preservat ion of the social order.

(b) Criticism. — It would be beyond the scope of this article to develop, or even briefly sketch, the argu- ment contained in the Scriptures and in the history of the Church for the truth that, from the beginning, Christianity was a dogmatic religion with a rule of faith, a rule of conduct, a definite, if not fully developed, system, with promises to be fulfilled for those who adhered to the creed, the discipline, and the sj'stem, and with anathemas for those who rejected them. The exposition and the proof of these facts constitute, in theology, the treatise on the Church (.see Chuhch). One obvious consideration may be briefly pointed out which lays bare the inconsistency of liberal indifferent- ism. If, as this theory admits, God did reveal any truth to men, then He surely intended that it should be believed. lie can not have meant that men should treat His revelation as of no importance, or that it should signify one thing to you and something entirely different to me, nor can He lie indifferent as to whether men interpret it correctly or incorrectly. If He re- vealed a religion, reason certainly tells us that such a religion mu.st be true, and all others that disagree with it false, and that He desires men to embrace it; other- wise, why should He have given any revelation at all? It is tnie that in many places the Scriptures are ol)- scure and has given us a revelation which is not so clearly or fully expressed in the Scriptures that reason can grasp it with certitude. He must have constituted some authority to teach us what is the burden of revelation.

The cogency of this reasoning when set forth at adequate length has led into the Catholic Church many sincere non-Catholics, who have observed how Ration- alism is rapidly dissolving religious faith over wide areas once occupied by dogmatic Protestantism. Present signs seem to indicate that, in the near future,. the religious struggle shall be, not between this or that form of religion, but between Catholicism and no reli- gion at all. It is true, of course, that reason, as the Vatican Council teaches, can, by its own native powers, reach with certitude the truths which suffice to form the basis of a natural religion. But it isalso true that, as Newman has said, the tendency of the human in- tellect, as such, has been, historically, towards simple unbelief in matters of religion: "No truth, however sacred, can stand against it in the long run; and hence it is that in the Pagan world, when our Lord came, the