Page:Philosophical Review Volume 2.djvu/35

1.] practical convenience.) The beginnings of the religion of the human race must be investigated. Two rules should be observed in this connection. In the first place, the origin of religion must be so conceived as to contain the germ of the succeeding development in some way or other, be it ever so low and crude. Secondly, since religion is a matter which concerns man as a whole, it can never be explained from a single motive, but by the co-operation of several motives and experiences. Thus, for example, nature-worship and ancestor-worship were from the very beginning most intimately allied. In considering the historical development of 'religion, account must be taken of the influences of the progress of civilization, of legislation, of science, and of art as powerful instruments of religious advancement. We must especially emphasize the profound and pre-eminent significance of those religious teachers who, by their creative power and the depth of their personal religious consciousness and moral nature, were able to see and reveal the truth more clearly than their own or any previous age had done. They thus opened up to mankind new paths for the realization of its ideals. The wonderful impression which these highly gifted personalities produce in every field — and most of all in the religious — furnishes a natural explanation of the miraculous legends and apotheoses which, in the popular creeds, are always connected with the lives of these individuals.

The classification of religions is a very difficult matter. Inner principles of division are necessary to satisfy the demands of philosophy. These principles are derived in part from the specific character of the belief in God (polytheism, pantheism, monotheism), and in part from the fundamental religious temperament, according to the manner in which natural and moral motives, feelings of dependence and of freedom, are combined in it. On this is based the distinction between aesthetical and teleological religions (Schleiermacher), or of natural, legal, and redemptory religions (A. Schweizer and others). The only difficulty is that such classifications, however attractive they may be in themselves, can never be unreservedly applied to the actual course of events. This is quite evident; for all religions