GE's Draft For J. Chapman to J. Martineau, Coventry, 29 August 1851
Title
GE's Draft For J. Chapman to J. Martineau, Coventry, 29 August 1851
Title
GE's Draft For J. Chapman to J. Martineau, Coventry, 29 August 1851
Sender
George Eliot [for John Chapman]
Recipient
J. Martineau
Date(s)
- 1851-08-29
Place
Coventry
Letter Content
GE's Draft For J. Chapman to J. Martineau, Coventry, 29 August 1851
40
MS: Yale. Endorsed: Draft of a letter to Mr. Martineau.
August 29, 1851.
My dear Sir
The application to you for an article on Christian Ethics and Modern Civilization was indeed not only by a general sense of your ability to treat such a subject, but more especially by the perusal of those passages in your recent article on the Creed of Christendom, 41 in which you briefly but forcibly exhibit the conviction that the moral teaching of the New Testament is inadequate and partly inapplicable to the needs of the present day, that Jesus himself, on the shewing of the synoptical gospels, was under the influence of serious error, and that the religious theory of Paul was based on the official destiny of Christ and not on his moral character.
The future Editors of the Westminster desire that the article in question should contain an impartial inquiry into the moral spirit and code of the primitive Christians as embodied in the New Testament, conducted on true principles of critical investigation and with entire freedom from conscious or unconscious predisposition to accommodate the phraseology of the Gospels and Epistles to the expression of modern ideas, or to use them with an esoteric meaning. The object of the article should be, not to sustain an argumentum ad hominem against the professor of Christianity by making the term cover as much truth as possible, but to ascertain in all simplicity what the New Testament writers really believed and meant to teach, what was the moral influence of their belief on themselves, and how far a strict conformity to their teaching in the present day would correspond with our modern ideal of individual and social life. The Editors believe that the moral perceptions are greatly confused &unknown;and the religious advancement retarded&unknown; by the vague reverence for Christ and Christianity which, owing to our national backwardness in critical science, has been countenanced by some of our most candid and recent writers on religious topics; hence their wish that the questions -- what are Christian Ethics? and How far are they available for our actual wants and in accordance with our highest conceptions? -- should be treated by a mind which to adequate critical knowledge unites thorough directness of purpose and deep sympathy with the onward movements of the age.
An article such as they desire would show that Jesus contributed no new element to ethics, that the emphasis which he gave by his teaching and life to certain true principles was partly counteracted by his misconceptions concerning his own mission and the divine government in general derived from his Jewish culture, and by the false views and expectations which he consequently communicated to his followers, and that the beneficial effect of his character on Christendom has been chiefly due to the substitution of the ideal for the historical. It would discriminate the character of the Pauline development with the moral bearing of its dogmatic elements, from that of the simple Christian school. It would place in strong light the vein of asceticism in the Christian system, leading to such monstrous results in the early centuries of the Church and causing perpetual offences against conscience in simple minds of our own day, its subordination of domestic and social duties to an impractical enthusiasm and the egotistic seeking for '91salvation'92, its depreciation of the present life [about 8 words deleted] especially as regards the culture of the intellect and taste, and its passivity towards political and social abuses -- all which had their foundation first in the dualistic theory -- the antithesis of God and the world, and next in the expectation of Christ's immediate return. The writer's strictures would extend over many other particulars of Christian theory and practice, for example the creation of doctrinal belief into the condition of fellowship, 42 but the main point would be to shew that the faith and life of the early Christians were entirely based on the idea of the special and the exceptional, whereas the essence of modern advancement is the recognition of the general and invariable, and this must henceforth be the standpoint of an effective religious and moral theory. The article, however, while shewing what Christianity has not done and cannot do for us, should do full justice to the positive side and endeavour clearly to define what we really owe to Christianity as a stage in the religious development of the race.
These few hints will enable you to decide whether the Editors may hope for the valuable aid of your pen on the above subject.
40
MS: Yale. Endorsed: Draft of a letter to Mr. Martineau.
August 29, 1851.
My dear Sir
The application to you for an article on Christian Ethics and Modern Civilization was indeed not only by a general sense of your ability to treat such a subject, but more especially by the perusal of those passages in your recent article on the Creed of Christendom, 41 in which you briefly but forcibly exhibit the conviction that the moral teaching of the New Testament is inadequate and partly inapplicable to the needs of the present day, that Jesus himself, on the shewing of the synoptical gospels, was under the influence of serious error, and that the religious theory of Paul was based on the official destiny of Christ and not on his moral character.
The future Editors of the Westminster desire that the article in question should contain an impartial inquiry into the moral spirit and code of the primitive Christians as embodied in the New Testament, conducted on true principles of critical investigation and with entire freedom from conscious or unconscious predisposition to accommodate the phraseology of the Gospels and Epistles to the expression of modern ideas, or to use them with an esoteric meaning. The object of the article should be, not to sustain an argumentum ad hominem against the professor of Christianity by making the term cover as much truth as possible, but to ascertain in all simplicity what the New Testament writers really believed and meant to teach, what was the moral influence of their belief on themselves, and how far a strict conformity to their teaching in the present day would correspond with our modern ideal of individual and social life. The Editors believe that the moral perceptions are greatly confused &unknown;and the religious advancement retarded&unknown; by the vague reverence for Christ and Christianity which, owing to our national backwardness in critical science, has been countenanced by some of our most candid and recent writers on religious topics; hence their wish that the questions -- what are Christian Ethics? and How far are they available for our actual wants and in accordance with our highest conceptions? -- should be treated by a mind which to adequate critical knowledge unites thorough directness of purpose and deep sympathy with the onward movements of the age.
An article such as they desire would show that Jesus contributed no new element to ethics, that the emphasis which he gave by his teaching and life to certain true principles was partly counteracted by his misconceptions concerning his own mission and the divine government in general derived from his Jewish culture, and by the false views and expectations which he consequently communicated to his followers, and that the beneficial effect of his character on Christendom has been chiefly due to the substitution of the ideal for the historical. It would discriminate the character of the Pauline development with the moral bearing of its dogmatic elements, from that of the simple Christian school. It would place in strong light the vein of asceticism in the Christian system, leading to such monstrous results in the early centuries of the Church and causing perpetual offences against conscience in simple minds of our own day, its subordination of domestic and social duties to an impractical enthusiasm and the egotistic seeking for '91salvation'92, its depreciation of the present life [about 8 words deleted] especially as regards the culture of the intellect and taste, and its passivity towards political and social abuses -- all which had their foundation first in the dualistic theory -- the antithesis of God and the world, and next in the expectation of Christ's immediate return. The writer's strictures would extend over many other particulars of Christian theory and practice, for example the creation of doctrinal belief into the condition of fellowship, 42 but the main point would be to shew that the faith and life of the early Christians were entirely based on the idea of the special and the exceptional, whereas the essence of modern advancement is the recognition of the general and invariable, and this must henceforth be the standpoint of an effective religious and moral theory. The article, however, while shewing what Christianity has not done and cannot do for us, should do full justice to the positive side and endeavour clearly to define what we really owe to Christianity as a stage in the religious development of the race.
These few hints will enable you to decide whether the Editors may hope for the valuable aid of your pen on the above subject.
Citation
George Eliot [for John Chapman], GE's Draft For J. Chapman to J. Martineau, Coventry, 29 August 1851, Complete George Eliot Letters(2026), George Eliot Archive, edited by Beverley Park Rilett. https://GeorgeEliotArchive.org, Accessed September 7, 2026. https://georgeeliotarchive.org/items/show/94235