contain the like solutions of moral propofitions, under the title of Revelation. One of thefe explanations namely boasts of stating the literal fenfe of the Writ, and is ftyled the grammatical interpretation: the other traces the ideas, that may originally have occafioned those fictions, and confiders the fubjects of mythology as the fymbols of thofe ideas. And this is juftly called the moral interpretation. If now each of the two purfues its own method of inquiry, difputes may eafily arife among the different interpreters; for they will frequently find oppofite meanings in one and the fame paffage. Thefe diffenfions in the interpretation of Scripture, daily dif play their baneful effects, however easily they might be fettled, if the interpreters were not averfe to enter into a proper agreement upon certain points. For, no man will deny, that all Revelation. refts upon the inward state of our mind; that all pofitive Religions are more or lefs perfect expreffions of Revelation; and that, therefore, the true interpretation of it can be discovered only by our own subjective operations. Hence it is, that thofe only, who are well acquainted with the nature of the human mind, can find the true fenfe of Revelations. Reafon is here likewife the fupreme tribunal, from which no further appeal can be made. The doctrines of the original evil, of reconciliation, and many other principles, peculiar to the Christian Religion, are founded on a basis, that admits of very excellent and useful reflections, upon the moral con Atitution of man, and upon the manner in which his destination has been provided for. Nay, from these doctrines, it is evident, how those opinions, which appear to have a common origin in human nature, have ever been reprefented through certain narratives and allegories; and how the minds of men in all ages reforted to them, as if they had been conducted by an invifible hand, without being uni formly conscious of their true meaning. And is there any greater fervice, which the philofophic inquirer can render mankind, than to investigate thefe traces of Reason, which, by their facred antiquity, have fo important an influence on human affairs; though their origin be, for the most part, involved in obfcurity. From this. investigation, the only explanation must refult, which can contribute to the attainment of that ultimate end, for which man is ori ginally ginally defigned. If, in this way of explaining fymbols, we fearchī merely for figns of fuch truths, as are previously discovered by our mind, the errors or mistakes cannot be fo detrimental, as if we aimed at finding the truth itself, by means of thefe fymbols. For, in the former cafe, imagination can merely mislead us to denote a true thing by a falfe fymbol; whereas, in the latter cafe, we are expofed to the danger of confounding a fymbol (to which our fancy is but too fondly attached) with the truth itself, and thus of falling into mere chimerical notions. Let us therefore fearch in the regions of truth; and, directing our views to the monuments of antiquity, inquire, whether among them we can difcover no figns correfponding with our moral attainments. Thus we may facilitate the access to the fanctuary of truth, in as much as our new method of explaining will ascertain, whether we have fucceeded in exploring the juft character of religious truths, and whether the true fense of the refpective symbols has ever been clearly underftood. CONTENTS. SECT. I. ON THE CONJUNCTION OR LEAGUE BETWEEN THE BAD AND GOOD PRINCIPLE; OR ON THE RADICAL EVIL IN HUMAN NATURE. 1. Of the original difpofition (inclination) towards the good in human nature. 2. Of the propensity to vice. 3. Whether man is naturally vicious. 4. Of the origin of evil in human nature. General Remarks. On the manner of reftoring to its vigour the original difpofition towards the good. SECT. II. ON THE CONTEST BETWEEN THE GOOD PRINCIPLE AND THE BAD, FOR THE DOMINION OVER MANKIND. 1. Of the legal claim of the good principle to the dominion over mankind. 2. Of the legal claim of the bad principle to that dominion, and the contest between the two principles. SECT. SECT. III. ON THE VICTORY of the good prINCIPLE OVER THE BAD, 1. Of the ethical state of nature. 2. Man must leave the ethical state of nature, in order to become a member of an ethical commonwealth. 3. The idea of an ethical commonwealth is that of a people of God, under ethical laws. 4. The idea of a people of God is (through human regula. tions) no otherwife to be exhibited in practice, but by the formation of a Church. 5. The conftitution of every church uniformly begins with fome or other hiftorical belief (revelation) which may be called the church-belief, and this is moft fuitably founded on a Holy Writ. 6. The pure religious belief is the fupreme interpreter of churchbelief. 7. The gradual tranfition of church-belief, to the exclufive prevalence of the pure religious belief, indicates the approach of a kingdom of God. Chap. II. Hiftorical exhibition of the gradual foundation of the predominance of the good principle upon Earth. SECT IV. OF THE WORSHIP AND SPURIOUS WORSHIP UNDER THE DOMI. NION OF THE GOOD PRINCIPLE, or of religiON AND PRIESTHOOD A. Of the divine fervice in Religion in general. 1. The Chriftian Religion confidered as a Natural Religion. 2. The Christian Religion confidered as a Learned Religion. B. Of the fpurious worship of God, in a flatutary Religion established by men. 1. Of the general fubjective ground of religious fancy. 2. * Pfaffenthum, in German, is not/literally priesthood,' nor does it fignify 'priest. craft ;' but it expreffes the ufurped dominion of the clergy, by which they pretend to be in the exclufive poffeffion of the means of difpenfing abfolution from. fins and divine grace. 2. The moral principles of Religion, confidered in oppofition to religious fancy. 3. Of Priesthood, as being an order of men engaged in the Spurious worship of the good principle. 4. Of the guide afforded by confcience, in matters of belief. XXVIII. Zum ewigen Frieden, &c. Project for a perpetual peace. A philofophical Eflay. 104 pp. 8vo. Königsberg, 1795. Of this original work, which is fo much and justly admired on the continent, we already poffefs an English translation. And if the appearance of this production in foreign verfions could eftablish any proof of its merits, I might add, that "Kant's project for a perpetual peace" has been likewife tranflated into French, and indeed with the fanction of the author, who has furnished the French tranflator with a new Supplement, which contains, " a fecret article for a perpetual peace." Many of our political readers must remember, that the idea of a perpetual peace has formerly employed the pen of the GOOD ABBOT DE ST. PIERRE; and that, at a ftill earlier period, the most patriotic King of whom France can boaft, HENRY IV, was seriously engaged in modelling this beneficent plan, which he propofed to fubmit to the confideration of his cotemporary potentates, if an untimely death had not fruftrated that philanthropic defign,Though our fage politicians have always confidered plans of this kind as the fanciful productions of good-natured fanatics, it may on the other hand be observed, that by difputing on the poffibility of a perpetual peace, the neceffity of a perpetual warfare must be admitted as a maxim; becaufe, without being continually prepared for war, the different ftates of Europe could not long exist together. This maxim, however, is as abominable in theory, as it is practically destructive of every principle of morality. For, if all independent ftates adopt or continue to practice fuch a maxim, and if their views be conftantly directed to the execution of it, their political existence itself must be extremely precarious. From this fource, I am inclined to derive the frequent revolutions in the political political world, the frequent returns from a ftate of intellectual and moral improvement to their former barbarifm, and the perpetual animofities (emphatically called, natural enmities) between man and man, which are so induftriously tranfmitted from one ge neration to another; especially in the frontier-provinces of different nations.-Man is a fighting animal! is the general outcry of all thofe who are interested, whether directly or indirectly, in propagating this abfurd and pernicious doctrine. Even admitting, that man is naturally prone to exercife his phyfical powers; that he has this propenfity in common with the lower animals; that he occafionally manifefts the defire of revenge and conqueft, not unlike the rapacious tyger or the victorious lion; and that he cannot eafily overcome thefe natural inclinations, as long as his inhuman feats are more admired and encouraged than the dignified, though lefs alluring, exertions of his intellect;-does it follow from these primitive difpofitions of favage man, that perpetual warfare is a neceffary evil in the prefent state of fociety? I hope for the honour of humanity, that none but the callous financiers of deluded nations, or the avaricious contractors of armies and navies, with their numerous train of connections, will be hardy enough to draw fo falfe a conclufion. When we confider thofe, who direct the affairs of nations, in a moral as well as legislative capacity, it is rather furprising, that the important plan of a perpetual peace has never been duly weighed: while many fubjects of lefs confequence, and comparatively trifling matters, daily occupy their attention. Nobody will deny, that the ideas of right and wrong, of just and unjust, are equally applicable to a plurality of ftates, as to different individuals of one or feveral countries. The only obftacle to the just applica tion of thefe ideas muft, therefore, lie in the diverity of opinions, arifing among thofe corrupted fervants of the ftate, to whom the management of external affairs is intrufted. Why, therefore, do the rulers of nations not agree upon a general federation of states? --Why do they not, like every other reasonable being, submit to arbitration, by choofing the arbiters from the bofom of difinterefted states; in order to fettle fuch differences as their own minifters cannot determine? This would be the only rational and proper method |