Remarks on the erroneous impressions and spirit of hostility at present existing, more especially amongst the religious public : in regard to the diffusion of scientific knowledge in general, and of phrenology and its supposed effects in particular / by H.G. Wright.

  • Wright, H. G.
Date:
1836
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Remarks on the erroneous impressions and spirit of hostility at present existing, more especially amongst the religious public : in regard to the diffusion of scientific knowledge in general, and of phrenology and its supposed effects in particular / by H.G. Wright. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    5/16 (page 5)
    the sentiments stated below,* who had deprecated that “ nar- row, exclusive, and monopolizing spirit,” which he feared was “ too characteristic of the more declared professors of the truth as it is in Jesus ;”-f* and who had subsequently borne testimony to the beneficial effects flowing from the rapid progress of education ;—I say I did feel considerable surprise, that this very writer should view the diffusion of intellectual and moral knowledge as bordering upon hostility to the Gospel! When .such a view is entertained, there must be some strange misap- prehension as to the nature and tendencies of the knowledge al- luded to. But, I would ask, in what respect do the lectures, treatises, school-books, and other means of diffusing knowledge above mentioned, differ from all former lectures, treatises, school-books, &c., which were never, so far as I know, objected to by the clergy ?; Are the lectures of Dr Hope, and Profes- sors Wilson and Jameson, in the College, less “ hostile to the Gospel,” than those given by Dr Fyfe, Mr Combe, and Pro- fessor Nichol, in the Waterloo Rooms? Is there some latent poison lurking in the words of the latter ? Does some moral Upas tree grow in these rooms, making the atmosphere fatal to all who breathe it ? Or is it the Philosophical Association that, like a modern Cerberus, with its three lecturers for its mouths, “ tria guttura yandens? indicates the proximity to Pandemo- nium ? “ Cerberus heec ingens latratu regna trifauci Personat ? ” Or does Mr Simpson hold up some Gorgon’s head, converting the hearts of all who enter the Cowgate Chapel into stone ? The lecturers and authors of the present day, as well as of the past, profess to expound the great laws by which the universe is governed. Where, then, lies this moral difference ? * u Those narrow and intolerant professors, who take an alarm at the very sound and semblance of philosophy, and feel as if there were an utter irrecon- cileable antipathy between its lessons on the one hand, and the soundness and piety of the Bible on the other. It were well, I conceive, for our cause, that the latter could become a little more indulgent on this subject; that they gave up a portion of those ancient and hereditary prepossessions which go so far to cramp and enthral them.”—Preface to Dr Chalmers's Astronomical Dis~ courses. t Discourse I. p. 20. 8th Edition.