It is well said, in every sense, that a man’s religion is the chief fact
\nwith regard to him. A man’s, or a nation of men’s. By religion I do not
\nmean here the church-creed which he professes, the articles of faith which
\nhe will sign and, in words or otherwise, assert; not this wholly, in many
\ncases not this at all. We see men of all kinds of professed creeds attain
\nto almost all degrees of worth or worthlessness under each or any of them.
\nThis is not what I call religion, this profession and assertion; which is
\noften only a profession and assertion from the outworks of the man, from
\nthe mere argumentative region of him, if even so deep as that. But the
\nthing a man does practically believe (and this is often enough _without_
\nasserting it even to himself, much less to others); the thing a man does
\npractically lay to heart, and know for certain, concerning his vital
\nrelations to this mysterious Universe, and his duty and destiny there, that
\nis in all cases the primary thing for him, and creatively determines all
\nthe rest. That is his _religion_; or, it may be, his mere scepticism and
\n_no-religion_: the manner it is in which he feels himself to be
\nspiritually related to the Unseen World or No-World; and I say, if you tell
\nme what that is, you tell me to a very great extent what the man is, what
\nthe kind of things he will do is. Of a man or of a nation we inquire,
\ntherefore, first of all, What religion they had? <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It is well said, in every sense, that a man’s religion is the chief fact with regard to him. A man’s, or a nation of men’s. By religion I do not mean here the church-creed which he professes, the articles of faith which he will sign and, in words or otherwise, assert; not this wholly, … <\/p>\n