Christian　Church。　The　question　is　thus　not　only　whether　regard　is　to　be　paid　to　Religion　in　the
  history　of　Philosophy；　for　it　has　been　the　case　that　Philosophy　has　paid　attention　to　Religion；　and
  the　latter　to　the　former。　Since　neither　of　the　two　has　allowed　the　other　to　rest　undisturbed；　we　are
  not　permitted　to　do　so　either。　Of　their　relations；　therefore；　we　must　speak　definitely；　openly　and
  honestly　…　aborder　la　question；　as　the　French　say。　We　must　not　hesitate；　as　if　such　a　discussion
  were　too　delicate；　nor　try　to　help　ourselves　out　by　beating　about　the　bush；　nor　must　we　seek　to
  find　evasions　or　shifts；　so　that　in　the　end　no　one　can　tell　what　we　mean。　We　must　not　seem　to　wish
  to　leave　Religion　alone。　This　is　nothing　else　than　to　appear　to　wish　to　conceal　the　fact　that
  Philosophy　has　directed　its　efforts　against　Religion。　Religion；　that　is；　the　theologians；　are　indeed　the
  cause　of　this；　they　ignore　Philosophy；　but　only　in　order　that　they　may　not　be　contradicted　in　their
  arbitrary　reasoning。
  It　may　appear　as　if　Religion　demanded　that　man　should　abstain　from　thinking　of　universal　matters
  and　Philosophy　because　they　are　merely　worldly　wisdom　and　represent　human　operations。　Human
  reason　is　here　opposed　to　the　divine。　Men　are；　indeed；　well　accustomed　to　a　distinction　between
  divine　teaching　and　laws　and　human　power　and　inventions；　such　that　under　the　latter　everything　is
  comprehended　which　in　its　manifestation　proceeds　from　the　consciousness；　the　intelligence　or　the
  will　of　mankind　which　makes　all　this　opposed　to　the　knowledge　of　God　and　to　things　rendered
  divine　by　divine　revelation。　But　the　depreciation　of　what　is　human　expressed　by　this　opposition　is
  then　driven　further　still；　inasmuch　as　while　it　implies　the　further　view　that　man　is　certainly　called
  upon　to　admire　the　wisdom　of　God　in　Nature；　and　that　the　grain；　the　mountains；　the　cedars　of
  Lebanon　in　all　their　glory；　the　song　of　the　birds　in　the　bough；　the　superior　skill　and　the　domestic
  instincts　of　animals　are　all　magnified　as　being　the　work　of　God；　it　also　implies　that　the　wisdom；
  goodness　and　justice　of　God　is；　indeed；　pointed　out　in　human　affairs；　but　not　so　much　in　the
  disposition　or　laws　of　man　or　in　actions　performed　voluntarily　and　in　the　ordinary　progress　of　the
  world；　as　in　human　destiny；　that　is；　in　that　which　is　external　and　even　arbitrary　in　relation　to
  knowledge　and　free…will。　Thus　what　is　external　and　accidental　is　regarded　as　emphatically　the
  work　of　God；　and　what　has　its　root　in　will　and　conscience；　as　the　work　of　man。　The　harmony
  between　outward　relations；　circumstances　and　events　and　the　general　aims　of　man　is　certainly
  something　of　a　higher　kind；　but　this　is　the　case　only　for　the　reason　that　this　harmony　is　considered
  with　respect　to　ends　which　are　human　and　not　natural　such　as　those　present　in　the　life　of　a　sparrow
  which　finds　its　food。　But　if　the　summit　of　everything　is　found　in　this；　that　God　rules　over　Nature；
  what　then　is　free…will？　Does　He　not　rule　over　what　is　spiritual；　or　rather　since　He　himself　is
  spiritual；　in　what　is　spiritual？　and　is　not　the　ruler　over　or　in　the　spiritual　region　higher　than　a　ruler
  over　or　in　Nature？　But　is　that　admiration　of　God　as　revealed　in　natural　things　as　such；　in　trees　and
  animals　as　opposed　to　what　is　human；　far　removed　from　the　religion　of　the　ancient　Egyptians；
  which　derived　its　knowledge　of　what　is　divine　from　the　ibis；　or　from　cats　and　dogs？　or　does　it
  differ　from　the　deplorable　condition　of　the　ancient　and　the　modern　Indians；　who　held　and　still　hold
  cows　and　apes　in　reverence；　and　are　scrupulously　concerned　for　the　maintenance　and　nourishment
  of　these　animals；　while　they　allow　men　to　suffer　hunger；　who　would　commit　a　crime　by　removing
  the　pangs　of　starvation　through　their　slaughter　or　even　by　partaking　of　their　food？
  It　seems　to　be　expressed　by　such　a　view　that　human　action　as　regards　Nature　is　ungodly；　that　the
  operations　of　Nature　are　divine　operations；　but　what　man　produces　is　ungodly。　But　the
  productions　of　human　reason　might；　at　least；　be　esteemed　as　much　as　Nature。　In　so　doing；
  however；　we　cede　less　to　reason　than　is　permitted　to　us。　If　the　life　and　the　action　of　animals　be
  divine；　human　action　must　stand　much　higher；　and　must　be　worthy　to　be　called　divine　in　an　infinitely
  higher　sense。　The　pre…eminence　of　human　thought　must　forthwith　be　avowed。　Christ　says　on　this
  subject　（Matt。　vi。　26…30）；　〃Behold　the　fowls　of　the　air；〃　（in　which　we　may　also　include　the　Ibis　and
  the　Kokilas；）　〃are　ye　not　much　better　than　they？　Wherefore；　if　God　so　clothe　the　grass　of　the　field；
  which　to…day　is；　and　to…morrow　is　cast　into　the　oven；　shall　He　not　much　more　clothe　you？〃　The
  superiority　of　man；　of　the　image　of　God；　to　animals　and　plants　is　indeed　implicitly　and　explicitly
  established；　but　in　asking　wherein　the　divine　element　is　to　be　sought　and　seen　…　in　making　use　of
  such　expressions　…　none　of　the　superior；　but　only　the　inferior　nature；　is　indicated。　Similarly；　in
  regard　to　the　knowledge　of　God；　it　is　remarkable　that　Christ　places　the　knowledge　of　and　faith　in
  Him　not　in　any　admiration　of　the　creatures　of　nature　nor　in　marvelling　at　any　so…called　dominion
  over　them；　nor　in　signs　and　wonders；　but　in　the　witness　of　the　Spirit。　Spirit　is　infinitely　high　above
  Nature；　in　it　the　Divine　Nature　manifests　itself　more　than　in　Nature。
  But　the　form　in　which　the　universal　content　which　is　in　and　for　itself；　first　belongs　to　Philosophy　is
  the　form　of　Thought；　the　form　of　the　universal　itself。　In　Religion；　however；　this　content　is　for
  immediate　and　outward　perception；　and　further　for　idea　and　sensation　through　art。　The　import　is
  for　the　sensuous　nature；　it　is　the　evidence　of　the　Mind　which　comprehends　that　content。　To　make
  this　clearer；　the　difference　must　be　recollected　between　that　which　we　are　and　have；　and　how　we
  know　the　same　…　that　is；　in　what　manner　we　know　it　and　have　it　as　our　object。　This　distinction　is　an
  infinitely　important　matter；　and　it　alone　is　concerned　in　the　culture　of　races　and　of　individuals。　We
  are　men　and　have　reason；　what　is　human；　or　above　all；　what　is　rational　vibrates　within　us；　both　in
  our　feelings；　mind　and　heart　and　in　our　subjective　nature　generally。　It　is　in　this　corresponding
  vibration　and　in　the　corresponding　motion　effected　that　a　particular　content　becomes　our　own　and
  is　like　our　own。　The　manifold　nature　of　the　determinations　which　it　contains　is　concentrated　and
  wrapt　up　within　this　inward　nature　…　an　obscure　motion　of　Mind　in　itself　and　in　universal
  substantiality。　The　content　is　thus　directly　identical　with　the　simple　abstract　certainty　of　ourselves
  and　with　self…consciousness。　But　Mind；　because　it　is　Mind；　is　as　truly　consciousness。　What　is
  confined　within　itself　in　its　simplicity　must　be　objective　to　itself　and　must　come　to　be　known。　The
  whole　difference　lies　in　the　manner　and　method　of　this　objectivity；　and　hence　in　the　manner　and
  method　of　consciousness。
  This　method　and　manner　extends　from　the　simple　expression　of　the　dullness　of　mere　feeling　to　the
  most　objective　form；　to　that　which　is　in　and　for　itself　objective；　to　Thought。　The　most　simple；　most
  formal　objectivity　is　the　expression　of　a　name　for　that　feeling　and　for　the　state　of　mind　according
  with　it；　as　seen　in　these　words；　worship；　prayer；　etc。　Such。　expressions　as　〃Let　us　pray〃　and　〃Let
  us　worship〃　are　simply　the　recalling　of　that　feeling。　But　〃Let　us　think　about　God〃　brings　with　it
  something　more；　it　expresses　the　absolutely　embracing　content　of　that　substantial　feeling；　and　the
  object；　which　differs　from　mere　sensation　as　subjective　self…conscious　activity；　or　which　is　content
  distinguished　from　this　activity　as　form。　This　object；　however；　comprehending　in　itself　the　whole
  substantial　content；　is　itself　still　undeveloped　and　entirely　undetermined。　To　develop　that　content；
  to　comprehend；　express　and　bring　to　consciousness　its　relations；　is　the　commencement；　creation
  and　manifestation　of　Religion。　The　form　in　which　this　developed　content　first　possesses　objectivity
  is　that　of　immediate　perception；　of　sensuous　idea　or　of　a　more　defined　idea　deduced　from　natural；
  physical　or　mental　manifestations　and　conditions。
  Art　brings　about　this　consciousness；　in　that　it　gives　permanence　and　cohesion　to　the　fleeting　visible
  appearance　through　which　objectivity　passes　in　sensation。　The　shapeless；　sacred　stone；　the　more
  place；　or　whatever　it　is　to　which　the　desire　for　objectivity　first　attaches　itself；　receives　from　art；
  form；　feature；　determinate　character　and　content　which　can　be　known　and　which　is　now　present
  for　consciousness。　Art　has　thus　become　the　instructress　of　the　people。　This　was　the　case　with
  Homer　and　Hesiod　for　instance；　who；　according　to　Herodotus　（II。　53）；　〃Made　the　Greeks　their
  Theogony；〃　because　they　elevated　and　consolidated　ideas　and　traditions　in　unison　with　the　spirit　of
  the　people；　wherever　and　in　whatever　confusion　they　might　be　found；　into　definite　images　and
  ideas。　This　is　not　the　art　which　merely　gives　expression　in　its　own　way　to　the　content；　already
  perfectly　expressed；　of　a　Religion　which　in　thought；　idea　and　words　has　already　attained　complete
  development；　that　is　to　say；　which　puts　its　matter　into　stone；　canvas；　or　words　as　is　don