[They] affect us more than foreign companies in hong kongall other compositions. The sentences of the olden time,which ejaculate this piety, are still fresh and fragrant. And the unique

impression of Jesus uponmankind,  written as ploughed into the history of this world, is proof ofthe subtle virtue of this infusion."[10]

[10] Miscellanies, 1868, p. 120 (abridged).

Such is the Emersonian religion. The universe has a divine soul of order, which soul is moral,being also the soul within the soul of man. But whether this soul of

the universe be a mere qualitylike the eye's brilliancy or the skin's softness, or whether it be a self-conscious life like the eye'sseeing or the skin's feeling, is

a decision brand buildingthat never unmistakably appears in Emerson's pages. Itquivers on the boundary of these things, sometimes leaning one way sometimes the other, to suitthe

literary rather than the philosophic need. Whatever it is, though, it is active. As much as if itwere a God, we can trust it to protect all ideal interests and keep

the world's balance straight. Thesentences in which Emerson, to the very end, gave utterance to this faith are as fine as anything inliterature: "If you love and

serve men, you cannot by any hiding or. Secret retributions are always restoring the level, when disturbed, of the divinejustice. It

is impossible to tilt the beam. All the tyrants and proprietors and monopolists of theworld in vain set their shoulders to heave the bar. Settles forevermore the

ponderous equator to itsline, and man and mote, and star and sun, must range to it, or be pulverized by the recoil."[11]

[11] Lectures and Biographical Sketches, 1868, p. 186.

Now it would be too absurd to say that the inner experiences that underlie such expressions offaith as this and impel the writer to their utterance are quite

unworthy to be called religiousexperiences. The sort of appeal that Emersonian optimism, on the one hand, and Buddhistic pessimism, on the other, make to the

individual and the son of response which he makes to them inhis life are in fact indistinguishable from, and in many respects identical with, the best

Christianappeal and response. We must therefore, from the experiential point of view, call these godless orquasi-godless creeds "religions"; and accordingly when in

our definition of religion we speak ofthe individual's relation to "what he considers the divine," we must interpret the term "divine" verybroadly, as denoting any

object that is god-LIKE, whether it be a concrete deity or not. But theterm "godlike," if thus treated as a floating general quality, becomes exceedingly vague, for

manygods have flourished in religious history, and their attributes have been discrepant enough. Whatthen is that essentially godlike quality--be it embodied in a concrete deity or not--our relation towhich determines our character as religious men? It will repay us to seek some answer to thisquestion before we proceed

farther ohmykids.