Естественная религия

Материал из Википедии — свободной энциклопедии
Перейти к навигации Перейти к поиску

Естественная религия — религия, возникшая в древности естественным путём (без участия божественного откровения) и/или связанная с поклонением природе.

В эпоху Просвещения это понятие широко использовалось деистами для описания «религии здравого смысла» или «религии разума»[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Однако разные мыслители вкладывали в него разное содержание[13][3][14]. Некоторые из них считали само это понятие бессмысленным[15]. Некоторые описывали этой фразой пантеистическое учение, согласно которому сама природа божественна. В современной философии этой фразой описывают использование «естественных» для человека когнитивных способностей, таких как разум, чувственное восприятие, способность к анализу своих мыслей и поступков, для рассмотрения вопросов религии; в современном смысле термин «естественная теология» обозначает то же самое[16][17].

Философ Питер Бирн  (англ.) (рус. выделил четыре группы представлений о естественной религии[18]:

  • Естественная религия как противоположность религии откровения
  • Естественная религия (теология) как противоположность гражданской теологии и мистической теологии[19]
  • Естественная религия как противоположность сверхъестественной религии
  • Естественная религия как присущая человеку от природы (естественная) религиозность


Ранние представления[править | править код]

Одна из ранних точек зрения на естественную религию была изложена французским философом Жаном Боденом в произведении «Беседа семерых о сокровенных тайнах возвышенных вещей» (написано в 1588[20] году, но не опубликовано; стало известно через рукописные копии в 1600-х годах). Там естественная религия рассматривается как старейшая религия прародителей человечества[21]. Книга представляет собой диалог семи представителей различных точек зрения: атеист, представители трёх направлений христианства (кальвинист, католик и лютеранин), иудаист, мусульманин и натурфилософ[20][2]. Они выражают свои взгляды на обсуждаемые вопросы, при этом во второй и третьей частях книги больше всего высказывается натурфилософ. В частности, он утверждает, что Бога можно познать только путём познания Его творения — «всеобъемлющего театра природы». Эту же точку зрения Боден почти теми же словами высказывал в другом своём произведении — Universae naturae theatrum (1596)[22]. Диалог заканчивается на согласии его участников с тем, что различные религиозные взгляды имеют право сосуществовать в гармонии. Гармония природы основана на многообразии, и эту гармонию многообразия нужно воссоздать и в сфере религии, то есть достичь религиозной толерантности, основанной на признании многообразия религий[21][23].

Работа Бодена ходила лишь в виде рукописи, поэтому она была доступна немногим и не оказала значительного влияния в то время. Представления о естественной религии были развиты в Англии в 1600-х годах[24]. В то время было распространено представление, в частности благодаря работам Гуго Гроция, что существует некое «естественное право» — определённые неизменные принципы, лежащие в основе любой системы права[25]. Гуго Гроций проводил параллели между естественным правом и естественной религией[26][27].

Герберт Чербери, рисунок Вацлава Холлара

Развивая мысль о «естественном праве», Герберт Чербери в 1645 году описал пять истин естественной религии[25][26][27]:

  • существует некое высшее божество;
  • его следует почитать;
  • важнейшей частью почитания является добродетель;
  • отход от добродетели надлежит искупать покаянием;
  • вознаграждение или кара ждут человека в этой жизни и после смерти[28].

Чербери считал, что эти пять аксиом, взятые в чистом виде, представляют собой исторический фундамент более поздних религий[25]. Формулируя эти принципы, Чербери следовал критерию истинности Викентия Леринского: «то, чему верили повсюду, всегда, все»[26].

В деизме[править | править код]

Пять истин естественной религии, которые изложил Герберт Чербери, впоследствии легли в основу деизма[29][30][26].

Деизм никогда не был однородным течением, и само слово «деист» изначально было ругательным ярлыком, который популяризировали критики, в частности, епископ Эдуард Стиллингфлит  (англ.) (рус. в своём «Письме к деисту» (1677)[31][32]. Поэтому представления о естественной религии несколько отличались у разных деистов. Общим у них было то, что они рассматривали существующие религии в сравнении с естественной религией, причём чаще всего сравнение было не в пользу существующих[33][34][35][1][2][36].

Деисты утверждали, что естественная религия не содержит обрядов и внешних атрибутов господствующих религий (католицизма и т. п.), также как и протестантского фанатизма. Они осуждали любую религиозную нетерпимость, считая, что суть различных религий едина[37]. Многие деисты считали, что естественная религия основана на разуме и здравом смысле[1][38]. Например, Мэтью Тиндал в работе «[religion.wikireading.ru/133646 Христианство, древнее как само Творение, или Евангелие как воспроизведение естественной религии]» (Christianity as Old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature, 1730), которую часто называли «Библией деистов»[39], определял естественную религию так[7]:

Под естественной религией я понимаю веру в существование Бога, а равно сознание и исполнение тех обязанностей, что вытекают из знаний, которые мы, по нашему разуму, имеем о нем и его совершенстве; и о себе, и о наших собственных недостатках и отношениях, в которых мы стоим перед ним и нашими ближними; так что религия природы охватывает все, что основано на разуме и природе вещей.

Оригинальный текст (англ.)
By natural religion, I understand the belief of the existence of a God, and the sense and practice of those duties which result from the knowledge we, by our reason, have of him and his perfections; and of ourselves, and our own imperfections, and of the relationship we stand in to him, and to our fellow-creatures; so that the religion of nature takes in everything that is founded on the reason and nature of things.

Понятие естественной религии использовалось для сопоставления с понятием религии откровения, часто для критики религий откровения[40]. Деист Томас Морган  (англ.) (рус. в 1738 году проводил различие между естественной и «позитивной, институализированной, откровенной религией», описывая последнюю так: «И говоря прямо, я назову это политической религией или религией иерархии»[41].

Ф. Макс Мюллер в лекциях «Естественная религия» 1888 года сказал[42][43]:

Две религии (иудаизм и христианство) считались, по крайней мере в Европе, отличающимися от всех остальных; эти две классифицировались как сверхъестественные и откровенные, в противоположность всем другим религиям, которые рассматривались как неоткровенные, как естественные, а некоторыми богословами даже как вдохновлённые силами зла.

Оригинальный текст (англ.)
These two religions (Judaism and Christianity] were considered, in Europe at least, as different in kind from all the rest, being classed as supernatural and revealed, in opposition to all other religions which were treated as non-revealed, as natural, and by some theologians even as inspired by the powers of evil.

Он же утверждал, что естественная религия может существовать и действительно существует без религии откровения, но обратное невозможно: религия откровения не существовала бы без естественной[11].

Дэвид Юм

Юм[править | править код]

Представление деистов о естественной религии впоследствии пошатнул шотландский философ Дэвид Юм[44][45].

В ряде работ (прежде всего «Естественная история религии» 1757 года и «Диалоги о естественной религии», написанная в 1751 году, опубликованная в 1779 году[46][47]) Юм утверждал, что естественная религия основана не на разуме, а на человеческих эмоциях. Естественная религия, если под этим термином подразумевать религиозные убеждения нецивилизованных народов, представляла собой суеверия, из которых проистекала вера во множество богов. Примитивный человек не был философом, ясно видящим истину единого Бога. Первобытными людьми руководил не здравый смысл, а страх[48][49][50][51][52].

Юм сделал вывод, что любая религия основана на человеческих слабостях, а разум и здравый смысл мало влияет на её развитие; он указал, что в этом плане естественная религия не имеет преимуществ перед религиями откровения[53][54].


Как религия природы[править | править код]

Ряд авторов, в том числе деисты, описывают естественную религию как старейшую религию, возникшую естественным путём (самопроизвольно) и связанную с поклонением силам Природы[8][55][56][57][10][11][58][59][60].

В частности, Ф. Макс Мюллер подробно описал, откуда берётся естественная религия и как она проявляется[61]:

Книжные религии сильно отличаются от безкнижных религий, и с исторической точки зрения это различие — очень верное основание для их разделения. Но достоинства книжных религий не должны заставлять нас думать, что безкнижные религии — это религии второго сорта.
Один индеец племени черноногих так описал разницу между своей религией и религией белого человека: «Великий Дух дал две религии. Одна — в книге для белых людей, которые, следуя этому учению, достигнут небес белого человека; другая — в головах индейцев, в небе, скалах, реках и горах. И краснокожие люди, которые слушают Бога в природе, услышат его голос и найдут в конце концов небеса свыше».
Та религия, которая в голове и в сердце, в небе, скалах, реках и горах — это то, что мы называем «Естественной религией». Её корни в природе, в человеческой природе и в той внешней природе, которая для нас является одновременно завесой и откровением Божественного.

Оригинальный текст (англ.)
There is a great difference between book-religions and bookless religions, and the difference offers, from an historial point of view, a very true ground of division. But because the book-religions have certain advantages, we must not imagine that the bookless religions are mere outcasts.

A Blackfoot Indian described the difference between his own religion and that of the white man in the following words [reference: The Indians, whence come they? by McLean, 1889, p.301]: 'There were two religions given by the Great Spirit, one in a book for the guidance of the white men who, by following its teachings, will reach the white man's heaven; the other is in the heads of the Indians, in the sky, rocks, rives, and mountains. And the red men who listen to God in nature will hear his voice, and find at last the heaven beyond.'

Now that religion which is in the head and in the heart, and in the sky, the rocks, the rivers and the mountains is what we call Natural Religion. It has its roots in nature, in human nature, and in that external nature which to us is at the same time the veil and the revelation of the Divine

Критика[править | править код]

Немецкий философ Фридрих Паульсен в 1892 году описывал естественную религию как абстрактную и считал, что она не может существовать. Он утверждал, что «тоску по религии» порождают человеческие чувства, относящиеся к трём категориям: страх и нужда; радость и изумление; разочарование и усталость от мира. Лишь историческая религия, то есть «вера, в которой жили и умирали отцы», способна удовлетворить эту тоску[62][63]:

«Когда начинает ощущаться потребность в религии, великие символы, ещё ребёнку толковавшие смысл мира, снова оживают в сознании. ... Построения философов, теории учёных, системы богословов проходят, подобно облакам, появляющимся вечером и исчезающим утром.
Религия существует и может существовать только в форме народной религии, исторически происходящей и конкретно выраженной в символах и священнодействиях. Абстрактная религия, как её искали под названием разумной или естественной, невозможна».

Помимо этого, Ф. Паульсен критиковал естественную религию за нехватку трансцендентной, сверхъестественной составляющей. При этом он также цитировал Э. Ренана, который критиковал деизм в целом: «Ясность деизма всегда будет мешать ему сделаться религией. Религия, которая была бы так ясна, как геометрия, не возбуждала бы ни любви, ни ненависти»[62][63].

См. также[править | править код]

Примечания[править | править код]

  1. ↑ 1 2 3 Т. П. Павлова. Естественная религия // Новая философская энциклопедия : в 4 т. / пред. науч.-ред. совета В. С. Стёпин. — 2-е изд., испр. и доп. — М. : Мысль, 2010. — 2816 с.
  2. ↑ 1 2 3 В. В. Соколов. Деизм // Новая философская энциклопедия : в 4 т. / пред. науч.-ред. совета В. С. Стёпин. — 2-е изд., испр. и доп. — М. : Мысль, 2010. — 2816 с.
  3. ↑ 1 2 Royce, 1908: «The term natural religion admits of a somewhat varied usage. Any treatment of the problems of religion which confines itself to an appeal to the unaided “light of nature,” — any effort to show that, apart from revelation, we can attain to truth possessing a religious value, comes within the range of the meaning of the term. In scholastic philosophy there was a definite and technical distinction made between so much of religious doctrine as the unaided human reason can demonstrate, and that portion of religion which only revelation can make known to us».
  4. ↑ Fenn, 1911, p. 460—461: «Again, and perhaps more commonly, natural religion designates a religion in harmony with the nature of man. ... According to this definition, therefore, all religion worthy of the name is natural. ... Let us assume arbitrarily, and for the purposes of the discussion, that natural religion means, what undoubtedly the founder of this lectureship understood it to mean, such knowledge of God, his existence and nature, as may be obtained by man through the exercise of his normal and rational powers directed to the study of the human and the material world. From the middle of the seventeenth to the middle of the nineteenth century, and particularly in the eighteenth, there was quite extraordinary interest in this subject, especially among the English».
  5. ↑ SEP, 2015: «The term “natural religion” is sometimes taken to refer to a pantheistic doctrine according to which nature itself is divine».
  6. ↑ Kuntz, 1975: «the oldest religion is the natural religion of the parents of the human race».
  7. ↑ 1 2 Waring, 1967: «Tindal: "By natural religion, I understand the belief of the existence of a God, and the sense and practice of those duties which result from the knowledge we, by our reason, have of him and his perfections; and of ourselves, and our own imperfections, and of the relationship we stand in to him, and to our fellow-creatures; so that the religion of nature takes in everything that is founded on the reason and nature of things." Christianity as Old as the Creation (II), quoted in Waring, p.113».
  8. ↑ 1 2 B.Taylor, 2008: «Most [of the scholarly works] wrestled with what they took to be the natural origins of religion, or with "natural religion," or with what they considered to be the "worship of nature". ... Among the most important were ... F.Max Muller's Natural Religion (1888)... F.Max Muller's historiography traced the origin of Indo-European religion to religious metaphors and symbolism grounded in the natural environment».
  9. ↑ Lyall, 1891: «I do not of course use the term Natural Religion in the sense given to it by the Bishop Butler, when he said that Christianity was a republication of Natural Religion. He meant, I think, religion according to right reason, framed upon the principle of accepting the course and constitution of Nature as an indext of the Divine Will. The meaning I wish to convey is of Religion in what Hobbes would call a State of Nature, moulded only by circumstances and feelings, and founded upon analogies drawn sometimes with ignorant simplicty, sometimes with great subtlety, from the operation of natural agencies and phenomena. ... What is it that evidently suggests the intentions and sets the model of divinity thus realized? Nothing but capricious and freely acting Nature».
  10. ↑ 1 2 Мюллер, 1888: «...what we call Natural Religion in its lowest and simplest form, — fear, awe, reverence, and love of the gods».
  11. ↑ 1 2 3 Мюллер, 1888: «Natural religion may exist and does exist without revealed religion. Revealed religion without natural religion is an utter impossibility».
  12. ↑ Deism (англ.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Дата обращения: 13 июня 2019. Цитата: «...what can be called natural religion, the acceptance of a certain body of religious knowledge that is inborn in every person or that can be acquired by the use of reason and the rejection of religious knowledge when it is acquired through either revelation or the teaching of any church.
  13. ↑ Fenn, 1911, p. 460: «In present theological conditions, one who is called upon to discourse concerning "natural religion as it is commonly called and understood by divines and learned men" finds himself embarrassed at the outset by the difficulty of defining his subject in accordance with the requirement, since the term is variously understood by "divines and learned men"».
  14. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «The concept of natural religion is a diverse and highly ramified one».
  15. ↑ Fenn, 1911, p. 460—461: «Here too, since religion resides in personality and, at least among those who employ this terminology, involves a relation to personality, natural religion becomes meaningless. ... Again, and perhaps more commonly, natural religion designates a religion in harmony with the nature of man—its doctrines capable of unification with his knowledge, its experiences interpreting and fulfilling all other experiences of his life. ... From this point of view, it is quite immaterial how religious ideas were derived: they may have been imparted by revelation, which in this case is held, as by Toland, to denote merely the way in which the ideas were communicated, or they may have sprung up within man himself. In either case, the point is that they are capable of appropriation into the unity of thought and experience and for this reason belong under the category of natural religion. According to this definition, therefore, all religion worthy of the name is natural, as according to the former it is supernatural. ... Without pursuing the analysis farther, let us assume arbitrarily, and for the purposes of the discussion, that natural religion means, what undoubtedly the founder of this lectureship understood it to mean, such knowledge of God, his existence and nature, as may be obtained by man through the exercise of his normal and rational powers directed to the study of the human and the material world. From the middle of the seventeenth to the middle of the nineteenth century, and particularly in the eighteenth, there was quite extraordinary interest in this subject, especially among the English, to whose common sense the facts of organic adaptation made convincing appeal».
  16. ↑ SEP, 2015: «The term “natural religion” is sometimes taken to refer to a pantheistic doctrine according to which nature itself is divine. “Natural theology”, by contrast, originally referred to (and still sometimes refers to)[1] the project of arguing for the existence of God on the basis of observed natural facts. In contemporary philosophy, however, both “natural religion” and “natural theology” typically refer to the project of using the cognitive faculties that are “natural” to human beings—reason, sense-perception, introspection—to investigate religious or theological matters. Natural religion or theology, on the present understanding, is not limited to empirical inquiry into nature, and it is not wedded to a pantheistic result. It does, however, avoid appeals to special non-natural faculties (ESP, telepathy, mystical experience) or supernatural sources of information (sacred texts, revealed theology, creedal authorities, direct supernatural communication). In general, natural religion or theology (hereafter “natural theology”) aims to adhere to the same standards of rational investigation as other philosophical and scientific enterprises, and is subject to the same methods of evaluation and critique».
  17. ↑ Principal Writings on Religion: Including Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion and The Natural History of Religion, цитата стр. Х «..natural religion, now more commonly called natural theology» в предисловии редактора John Charles Addison Gaskin
  18. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «The concept of natural religion is not a unitary notion. Of the many senses of the phrase 'natural religion' to be found in philosophical thought four will occupy our attention as we trace the emergence of the concept of religion. Three can be brought out by considering the oppositions or distinctions in which 'natural religion' or the allied 'natural theology' can figure. These oppositions are: (1) natural religion (theology) versus revealed religion (theology); (2) natural theology versus civil and mythic theology; (3) natural religion versus supernatural religion. The fourth sense of 'natural religion' to be treated does not fit so easily into a pair of opposites, being used to refer to a natural human religiousness».
  19. ↑ Августин Блаженный. О граде Божьем. Творения блаженного Августина, епископа Иппонийского. Ч. 3-5. (413-427 гг.). Дата обращения: 13 августа 2019. Архивировано 21 февраля 2022 года.
  20. ↑ 1 2 Kuntz, 1975.
  21. ↑ 1 2 Kuntz, 1975: «The dialogue ends without rejection or acceptance of any one religion but rather with recognition of the divine descent of all religious beliefs and the universal brotherhood of men in the worship of divinity and in a moral life and free conscience for everyone. As the harmony of nature is based on multiplicity, and the oldest religion is the natural religion of the parents of the human race, so there is need for the harmony of nature, based on multiplicity, to be applied to questions of religion and therefore a tolerance of all religions».
  22. ↑ Kuntz, 1975: «God can be best known from the theater of universal nature. "In this elegant allegory it is indicated that God cannot be known from higher or antecedent causes, which are none, but only from behind, that is, from effects... and He placed man not in a hidden recess but in the middle of the world, so that he might contemplate more easily and better than if he were in the heaven the universe of all things and all His works, and from the wealth of His works man might probingly view the Sun, that is, God Himself." Universae naturae theatrum, p. 633».
  23. ↑ Гугняк, 2015: «Жан Боден ... выступал сторонником веротерпимости, равноправия всех религий. Естественная (разумная) религия, по его замыслу, должна была объединить верующих, и не только христиан, взяв за основу то общее, что присуще всем развитым религиозным верованиям: признание Единого Бога, морального сознания, свободу человека. В дальнейшем идею создания естественной религии пытались развивать многие европейские мыслители».
  24. ↑ Thomsen, 1909, p. 271: «The first pioneers [of deism] are .... and especially Bodin, who in 1593 wrote the Colloquium heptaplomeres, a religious philosophical work which, however, became of no great consequence, as it appeared only in a few manuscript copies circulating exclusively in the literary world. ... Even if Bodin is the actual founder of deism, it was the English philosophy that had to prepare the way from a historical point of view. The English deism was initiated by Herbert of Cherbury as the doctrine of "natural religion"».
  25. ↑ 1 2 3 Thomsen, 1909, p. 271: «It was then generally believed that one could refer to a "law of nature," certain unchangeable principles forming the immovable basis of any judicial system. In like manner Herbert of Cherbury was of the opinion that all religions rest on five axioms, which in their pure state form the historical basis of the later, misreprestented popular religions».
  26. ↑ 1 2 3 4 Статья «Deism». Архивировано 5 июня 2020 года. из одиннадцатого издания «Британской энциклопедии»: «Lord Herbert of Cherbury earned the name “Father of Deism” by laying down the main line of that religious philosophy which in various forms continued ever after to be the backbone of deistic systems. ... he found as foremost his five articles: that there is one supreme God, that he is to be worshipped, that worship consists chiefly of virtue and piety, that we must repent of our sins and cease from them, and that there are rewards and punishments here and hereafter. Thus Herbert sought to do for the religion of nature what his friend Grotius was doing for natural law,—making a new application of the standard of Vincent of Lerins, Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus. In the substance of what they received as natural religion, the deists were for the most part agreed; Herbert’s articles continued to contain the fundamentals of their theology».
  27. ↑ 1 2 Jacqueline Lagree. Grotius: Natural Law and Natural Religion (англ.) // Religion, Reason and Nature in Early Modern Europe / Robert Crocker. — Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2001. — P. 17—39. — ISBN 9789401597777. — doi:10.1007/978-94-015-9777-7_2.
  28. ↑ Кузнецов Е.В., Минеева Т.Г. Естественно-правовая теория и религия. Исторический аспект 232-235. Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н.И.Лобачевского (2007). Дата обращения: 15 июля 2019. Архивировано 15 июля 2019 года.
  29. ↑ Fenn, 1911, p. 469: «Hence we find Lord Herbert of Cherbury announcing five truths of natural religion which, as he believed, were innate in man and consequently were in need of no external support».
  30. ↑ IEP, Lord Herbert of Cherbury: «The second work [De religions Gentilium errorumque apud eos causes (London, 1645)] lays down the common marks by which religious truth is recognized. These are (1) a belief in the existence of the Deity, (2) the obligation to reverence such a power, (3) the identification of worship with practical morality, (4) the obligation to repent of sin and to abandon it, and, (5) divine recompense in this world and the next».
  31. ↑ Deism (англ.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Дата обращения: 13 июня 2019. Цитата: «...it became an adjective of opprobrium in the vocabulary of their opponents. Bishop Edward Stillingfleet’s Letter to a Deist (1677) is an early example of the orthodox use of the epithet».
  32. ↑ Статья «Deism» из одиннадцатого издания «Британской энциклопедии»: "The words «deism» and «deist» appear first about the middle of the 16th century in France (cf. Bayle’s Dictionnaire, s.v. "Viret, « note D), though the deistic standpoint had already been foreshadowed to some extent by Averroists, by Italian authors like Boccaccio and Petrarch, in More’s Utopia (1515), and by French writers like Montaigne, Charron and Bodin. The first specific attack on deism in English was Bishop Stillingfleet’s Letter to a Deist (1677)».
  33. ↑ Sire, 2009, p. 59: «Unlike Christian theism, there is no orthodox deism, each deist is free to use reason, intuition, tradition... Deism has not been a stable compound».
  34. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «There is in fact a great variety of detailed opinion among the writers customarily awarded with the title 'deist'. The variety among those called 'deists' has led one recent commentator to speak of the 'elusiveness of deism' and to conclude that 'deism' should function only as a label of convenience for the historian of ideas rather than a precise term of analysis (Sullivan 1982:232)».
  35. ↑ Deism (англ.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Дата обращения: 13 июня 2019. Цитата: «...Though the Deists differed among themselves and there is no single work that can be designated as the quintessential expression of Deism, they joined in attacking both the existing orthodox church establishment and the wild manifestations of the dissenters».
  36. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «The most thorough commentary on deism of the time, Leland's [1] view of the Principal Deistic Writers, has simlar difficulties in pinning down an agreed philosophy of religion for deism. Leland speaks of the 'several schemes' formed by those called deists having one common end 'viz, to set aside revelation, and to substitute mere natural religion, or which seems to have been the intention of some of them, not religion at all, in its room' (Leland 1757a:ii)».
  37. ↑ Deism (англ.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Дата обращения: 13 июня 2019. Цитата: «...their Deist ideal was sober natural religion without the trappings of Roman Catholicism and the High Church in England and free from the passionate excesses of Protestant fanatics. ... All are agreed in denouncing every kind of religious intolerance because the core of the various religions is identical. In general, there is a negative evaluation of religious institutions and the priestly corps who direct them».
  38. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «...a standpoint which offers on the one hand, a negative critique of claims for the uniqueness and divine characted of any revealed religion (including Christianity), and, on the other, a positive affirmation that a religion founded on reason and nature is sufficient for salvation. ... It can be found in Tindal's major work and...».
  39. ↑ Waring, 1967, p. 107: «Christianity as Old as the Creation became, very soon after its publication, the focal center of the deist controversy. Because almost every argument, quotation, and issue raised for decades can be found here, the work is often termed 'the deist's Bible'».
  40. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «Contrast between, on the one hand, Christiantity or revealed religion and, on the other, natural religion or the religion of nature (see Morgan 1739:15). ... The contrast does not indeed have to be thought of as an opposition...».
  41. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «Thus Thomas Morgan distinguishes between natural and 'positive, instituted, revealed religion' and of the latter says 'And to avoid circumlocution, I shall call this the political religion, or the religion of the hierarchy' (Morgan 1738:94)».
  42. ↑ Byrne, 1989: «This sense of 'natural religion' is contained in remarks from F. Max Mueller's lectures on Natural Religion of 1889: These two religions (Judaism and Christianity] were considered, in Europe at least, as different in kind from all the rest, being classed as supernatural and revealed, in opposition to all other religions which were treated as non-revealed, as natural, and by some theologians even as inspired by the powers of evil. (Mueller 1889:51)».
  43. ↑ Мюллер, 1888.
  44. ↑ В. В. Соколов. Деизм // Новая философская энциклопедия : в 4 т. / пред. науч.-ред. совета В. С. Стёпин. — 2-е изд., испр. и доп. — М. : Мысль, 2010. — 2816 с. «Своеобразна позиция Юма: автор «Естественной истории религии» признает закономерность идеи «высшего разума», «некоторой разумной причины» и «разумного творца», но вместе с тем подрывает принципы деизма своим скептицизмом и утверждением фиктивного характера «естественной религии», считая, что в основе религии лежат человеческие эмоции, чаще всего стимулируемые страхом».
  45. ↑ Thomsen, 1909, p. 277: «...the natural religion laid down by the English deists, starting with Herbert of Cherbury, ending with Hume, a fact plainly shown by Hume's own definitions (sections VI and XIV)».
  46. ↑ Тажуризина З.А. «Естественная история религии»: развитие философского осмысления религии Дэвидом Юмом. Рабочий университет им. И.Б. Хлебникова. Дата обращения: 4 сентября 2019. Архивировано 4 сентября 2019 года.
  47. ↑ IEP, Hume's Influence: «Far greater is the influence of David Hume (d. 1776), who summarized the Deistic criticism and raised it to the level of modern scientific method by emancipating it from the conception of a deity conceived through the reason and by abandoning its characteristic interpretation of history. ... He thus overthrow the Deistic philosophy of religion while he developed their critical method to the extent of making it the starting-point for the English positivist philosophy of religion. Distinguishing between the metaphysical problem of the idea of God and the historical problem of the rise of religions, he denied the possibility of attaining a knowledge of deity through the reason, and explained religion as arising from the misconception or arbitrary misinterpretation of experience (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, written in 1751, but not published till 1779; Natural History of Religion, 1757). ... Human experience, affected by ignorance, fancy, and the imaginings of fear and hope, explains sufficiently the growth of religion. The fundamental principles of Deism became tinged in the nineteenth century with skepticism, pessimism, or pantheism, but the conceptions of natural religion retained largely their old character».
  48. ↑ Waring, 1967, p. xv: «The origin of religion was chiefly to be found in fear. The clear reasonableness of natural religion disappeared before a semi-historical look at what can be known about uncivilized man — "a barbarous, necessitous animal," as Hume termed him. Natural religion, if by that term one means the actual religious beliefs and practices of uncivilized peoples, was seen to be a fabric of superstitions. Primitive man was no unspoiled philosopher, clearly seeing the truth of one God. And the history of religion was not, as the deists had implied, retrograde; the widespread phenomenon of superstition was caused less by priestly malice than by man's unreason as he confronted his experience».
  49. ↑ Russell, 2005: «Hume’s primary objective in this work [The Natural History of Religion, 1757] is to show that the origins and foundations of religious belief do not rest with reason or philosophical arguments of any kind but with aspects of human nature that reflect our weaknesses, vulnerabilities and limitations (i.e., fear and ignorance)».
  50. ↑ Russell, 2005: «Hume’s primary aim in The Natural History of Religion, as we have noted, is to show that the origin and foundations of religious belief does not rest with reason or philosophical argument. The origins of religious belief rest with human fear and ignorance, which gives rise, in the first place, to polytheism».
  51. ↑ Thomsen, 1909, p. 280-281: «The adherents of "natural religion" came to the conclusion that the universal dogmas expressed in this religion were the principal ones also from a historical point of view. This idea was already entertained by Herbert of Cherbury, but it was more emphasized by his successors Browne (1605-81) and Blount (1954-93). "Natural" religion became the primitive religion of mankind... The people profiting by everything in religion which was considered an unnecessary and obnoxious appendix to the pure natural religion. ... By a concise, careful argumentation Hume demostrates the absurdity of the belief in primitive theism».
  52. ↑ David Hume. The Natural History of Religion (неопр.). — 1779. “The primary religion of mankind arises chiefly from an anxious fear of future events; and what ideas will naturally be entertained of invisible, unknown powers, while men lie under dismal apprehensions of any kind, may easily be conceived. Every image of vengeance, severity, cruelty, and malice must occur, and must augment the ghastliness and horror which oppresses the amazed religionist... And no idea of perverse wickedness can be framed, which those terrified devotees do not readily, without scruple, apply to their deity.” (Section XIII)
  53. ↑ Russell, 2005: «The conclusion that Hume draws from all this is that religion generally rests on human weaknesses and vulnerabilities and that reason has little influence over its evolution or stability».
  54. ↑ Thomsen, 1909, p. 273: «In this Dialogue Hume gives his own conception of life; Philo, and only he, represents Hume's own opinions. These are practially far behind the English deism and may be summed up in the following words. It is no good advancing arguments for any religious doctrine, not even for the general dogmas of "natural religion." The true conclusion for human beings is the belief in a world carrying on its operations, indifferent to all our notions of good and evil. The world itself is neither good nor evil. ... The Hume's real aim was against deism, natural religion founded upon certain theoretical or moral arguments. Deism had made the revealed religion irrational. Hume pointed out that religion is irrational, even in its abstractest and most rational form, the belief of the deist in theoretical or ethical rationality».
  55. ↑ Lyall, 1891: «...particular importance of India as a field of observation and research in identifying and tracking through connected stages the grown and filiation of some of the principal ideas that undobtedly ilke at the roots of Natural Religion».
  56. ↑ Lyall, 1891: «I do not of course use the term Natural Religion in the sense given to it by the Bishop Butler, when he said that Christianity was a republication of Natural Religion. He meant, I think, religion according to right reason, framed upon the principle of accepting the course and constitution of Nature as an indext of the Divine Will. The meaning I wish to convey is of Religion in what Hobbes would call a State of Nature, moulded only by circumstances and feelings, and founded upon analogies drawn sometimes with ignorant simplicty, sometimes with great subtlety, from the operation of natural agencies and phenomena. The presence, the doings, and the character of numerous superhuman beings are thus directly inferred from what actually happens to men in the world around them; and a mysterious kind of design is perceived in every uncommon motion, or shape, or sensation. What is it that evidently suggests the intentions and sets the model of divinity thus realized? Nothing but capricious and freely acting Nature».
  57. ↑ Lyall, 1891: «Pantheism is the Philosophy of Natural Religion».
  58. ↑ Мюллер, 1888: «We have thus surveyed the whole field of Natural Religion, and discovered the three great divisions into which it naturally falls. Nature, Man and Self are the three great manifestations in which the infinite in some shap or other has been perceived, and every one of these perceptions has it its historical development contributed to what may be called religion».
  59. ↑ Мюллер, 1888: «Let no one attempt to study Natural Religion without having served his apprenticeship as a patient student of the history of the religions of the world».
  60. ↑ Thomsen, 1909, p. 280-281: «The adherents of "natural religion" came to the conclusion that the universal dogmas expressed in this religion were the principal ones also from a historical point of view. This idea was already entertained by Herbert of Cherbury, but it was more emphasized by his successors Browne (1605-81) and Blount (1954-93). "Natural" religion became the primitive religion of mankind».
  61. ↑ Мюллер, 1888: «There is a great difference between book-religions and bookless religions, and the difference offers, from an historial point of view, a very true ground of division. But because the book-religions have certain advantages, we must not imagine that the bookless religions are mere outcasts. A Blackfoot Indian described the difference between his own religion and that of the white man in the following words [reference: The Indians, whence come they? by McLean, 1889, p.301]: 'There were two religions given by the Great Spirit, one in a book for the guidance of the white men who, by following its teachings, will reach the white man's heaven; the other is in the heads of the Indians, in the sky, rocks, rives, and mountains. And the red men who listen to God in nature will hear his voice, and find at last the heaven beyond.' Now that religion which is in the head and in the heart, and in the sky, the rocks, the rivers and the mountains is what we call Natural Religion. It has its roots in nature, in human nature, and in that external nature which to us is at the same time the veil and the revelation of the Divine».
  62. ↑ 1 2 Паульсен, 1892.
  63. ↑ 1 2 Гугняк, 2015.

Литература[править | править код]

На русском языке
На английском языке
Источник — https://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Естественная_религия&oldid=132017400