A utopian radical

Most important for Mill, in what he viewed as a two-step process, destruction first and reconstruction next, was the eradication of Christianity and its replacement with a new religion of man. Accordingly, Hamburger devotes the middle four chapters of his book to exploring with great care these central planks in Mill's revolutionary strategy.

For Mill, Christianity was simultaneously the teacher of selfishness--for him the most serious character flaw that must be overcome--and of self-abnegation. These two otherwise incompatible criticisms are not in tension for Mill because for him true individuality is expressed through altruism. Thus, Christianity is destructive of both sociability and individuality. Mill, of course, was able to take this position because of his utter lack of acquaintance with human nature--most particularly normally sexed men. (4) Given his view of human nature as being absolutely plastic, Mill could believe that if Christianity were to be eradicated and replaced with a "religion of man," then men could be taught to love themselves in others and, thus, become fully altruistic.

Unlike most Victorians who were unbelievers but who believed that Christianity was a salutary myth, for Mill it was above all Christianity that stood in the way of human progress. Its eradication, then, was essential, and this could best be accomplished by attacking its dogmas in a world of free thought and discussion. "Mill expected that 'real freedom of speculation' would have the effect of 'making [all persons] unbelievers.'" In short, his goal was to embarrass and discredit Christianity into oblivion through open discussion and debate; thus, the necessary defense of the freedom of thought and discussion--as an instrumental rather than an intrinsic good.

Less convincing is Hamburger's unwillingness to concede that, in a certain sense, Mill himself can be described as some kind of Christian along the lines of, say, contemporary Unitarians. Mill, in his life, resembles a Christian monk whom God has abandoned. Yet his ascetic life was still devoted to service, in this case, to mankind. Was not Mill, in truth, prescient in his teachings? Has not Christianity become ever more human-centered since Mill? Today, is it not the case that most elite Christians view the Second Tablet of the Ten Commandments as the only one worthy of attention? Do they not love God primarily in light of their love of man? Quite possibly, then, in spite of his evident hatred of organized Christianity, Hamburger might have taken more seriously Mill's embrace of Jesus the man--and the possibility that Mill, somewhat like Locke in his "Letter on Toleration," was marking out the boundaries of Christianity's future--one in which the love of man replaces the love of God. How ironic it would be if Mill has accomplished his goal of destroying theocentric Christianity, but only by working from within Christianity (and Judaism as well) rather than from without.