Imagens das páginas

Such a view satisfies our intellectual demands by positing a sufficient cause in strict analogy with experience, which while spiritual is not supernatural-which acts not because of law, but because of which law is.

Such a view, is the only one which satisfactorily accounts for the evidences of "design" in Nature, while permitting such design to be accomplished through material laws by traceable methods. It hampers science in no respect, but gives free scope to investigation and "accepts the mechanical interpretation of nature's laws to the uttermost." It does not limit the field of investigation and say "thus far and no further," but allows to science in the freest spirit the boundless field of all that is.

In the light of this view, the standing quarrel between religion and evolution disappears from sight. It is no longer a question between divine foresight and divine interposition. There is seen to be no "interposition" possible. It is a question simply of divine method.

Let us frankly admit such a view-no harm but much good can come of it. To science belongs the whole field. Physical, social, mental, moral-it is one "reign of law," one "unity of nature," the visible expression of one will-natural, not supernatural. Let us expunge this word "supernatural" from our vocabulary-it has always made harm-and let science and faith strike hands not merely in amity, but in full accord. If there is a God, all roads must lead to Him, and there is no terra-incognita, observable by us, which needs to be jealously fenced off from the field of natural law.

From this standpoint the "a priori proofs" appeal with new and added force. This wondrous system-its amazing vastness, which knows no distance, includes all motions and covers all time-the wondrous variety and still more wondrous unity in variety—the absolute perfection of detail-the unlimited power-the mysteriousness-in a word, the absolute crushing wisdom, of the whole awful mechanism find in this conception alone, the only intellectually satisfying scientific cause and reason, and far back of the infinite complexity we recognize the final unity of

66 one far-off divine event
To which the whole creation moves."

The idea of the supernatural, of a region on this earth closed to science, where continuity ceases and uniformity cannot be assumed, has been and is productive of harm. In the interests of truth and peace let us give it up. It is time! When one speaking in the interests of faith, and speaking with authority, proclaims this or that subversive of his faith, who is to blame, if finding this or that to be true, we take him at his word and deny his faith? "Trust your reason," cries Leslie Stephens, in this very spirit-"trust your reason, we have been told till we are tired of the phrase, and you will become Atheists or Agnostics. We take you at your word; we become Agnostics." This is the real conflict! It fills the religious press. I take up a paper at random and its editorial is to this effect: I read of the "pronounced theories" of Darwin and the "brilliant affirmation" of Tyndall. Further on these expressions naturally change to such as "domineering" and "charlatanry," and "one-sided" "superficial thinking." We learn that no "technical knowledge" is necessary to know that Tyndall can't get ethical truth "out of his retorts and crucibles." That "experimenting with blowpipes and gases can give no knowledge of God and the soul. That no spiritual realities can be reached by "grubbing among earthworms" like Darwin.


I have spoken to little purpose, if such remarks do not now carry their own refutation. If our writer finds that it is something to rejoice at that our "younger men" no longer "flout religion nor scoff at religious men," the gratifying result cannot be laid at his door nor ascribed to the tendency of such views as these. God's truths not to be found in retorts and crucibles!-where should they be found, if not wherever His laws are found in operation? Here, or nowhere, now or never, is God's government, and in the grand unity of that government, which it is given to man to discern, one may well rise, even from an earth-worm to a star.

"Flower in the crannied wall,

I pluck you out of the crannies ;—
Hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower,-but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, and all in all,
I should know what God and man is."

This is more than good poetry, it is sound science. Wherever God's government is found on earth, science, or the study of God's laws, claims the right to go-and wherever science goes there can be no super-natural.

We sometimes hear deplored now-a-days, the "scientific tendency" to "push God out of His Universe," or at least to push Him further and further back, until He becomes a mere abstraction at best. Now, if all roads in science lead to God, if all laws converge in the law-giver, how shall we ever reach the center if we go not back upon the roads? Why, to thus search back is "one of the profoundest necessities of our intellectual nature!" Has not the result thus far justified the necessity?

There is, I venture to think, a tendency more harmful than this a tendency which has always made harm and which is hurtful to-day as ever-a tendency which not only closes the road to progress, but obscures the eye of faith-the tendency to shut up certain avenues of thought, and ticket them with the sign, "No thoroughfare! This way lies the swamp of the supernatural!"

I like to think that there is a more liberal faith than this, which holds that knowledge of the mind of God does not essentially depend upon exclusive study of the written and printed records vouchsafed to one "peculiar nation." That to all men has been made a revelation, not written or printed in perishable characters, but spread out before every man in characters which endure forever and which all may read. The lesson of this revelation has not waited for science to interpret it. The deepest rendering which science can give but confirms the reading which faith receives without question. This reading has been and is the common property of all, and the superficial glance gathers from it the deepest truths. So it has been through long ages before the birth of science, and thus only can it happen that the deepest truths of science to-day, but serve to confirm the most ancient faith of all mankind.

It is by no means an impossible or even an improbable hypothesis that this little world of ours is not alone among the myriads of those whose central suns shine in our heavens, the abode of intelligent and reasoning beings. If this be so-and

who can say that it is not?-those unknown beings, separated from us though they are by such an awful chasm of space and time are our brothers, co-heirs with us of one great Revelation. They look out upon the same great book of Nature which lies open to our gaze; read from it the same lessons; learn from it the same laws; recognize everywhere the workings of the same MIND, the same great INTELLIGENCE, the same unchanging WILL, the same uniformity, the same unity, the same continuity-acknowledge the same Revelation-worship the same God! Who shall say then, that to those of our own race, here on earth, separated by lesser, but to them equally insurmountable barriers of space and time-this great and universal revelation has been denied?

"Who shall say that to no mortal
Heaven e'er oped its mystic portal,
Gave no dream or revelation
Save to one peculiar nation?

Souls sincere, now voiceless, nameless,
Knelt at altars fired and flameless,

Asked of Nature, asked of Reason,

Sought through ev'ry sign and season,
Seeking God; through darkness groping,
Waiting, striving, longing, hoping,
Weeping, praying, panting, pining,

For the light on Israel shining!

Oh, it must be! God's sweet kindness

Pities erring human blindness;

And the soul whose pure endeavor

Strives toward God, shall live forever;

Live by the Great Father's favor,
Saved by an unheard-of Saviour."

In this great and universal revelation, old faiths must find their continual justification. If this light is to continue to shine and to become clearer it must not be obscured. In this spirit the old faiths may yet glow in new lustre, and the spiritual in nature, not the supernatural apart from Nature; God everywhere seen in His works and studied in His laws-be the starting point of a new Science and the most efficient bulwark of an old Faith.

A. J. DuBois.

[ocr errors]


PERHAPS no further notice of, or reply to the "Open Letter" to the editor published in the September number of the NEW ENGLANDER and YALE REVIEW, commenting upon and criticising an Article published in the previous August number, is needed than that contained in the editorial note appended to the critique. Certainly the subject is one that neither calls for nor admits of much controversy since it is mainly a matter of individual taste and judgment, and it would undoubtedly be trespassing upon ground sacred to the individual" to enter upon any argument pro or con upon the several points raised or controverted in the "Open Letter" referred to. The writer of the Article criticized will, therefore, limit himself to noticing one or two vulnerable points in the rather over-serious arraignment of his essay which seem fairly to challenge a little counter-criticism. In the first place it may reasonably be objected both on behalf of the distinguished poet and for himself that the critic misquotes (or is made to misquote by the type), one of the controverted citations from the In Memoriam. Tennyson does not commit the solecism of saying, as the critic quotes him:

Looks thy fair form

Nor would he, probably, have employed the expression he does

[blocks in formation]

if the prevailing image in his mind had been masculine. At all events, the line should be read as the poet wrote it.

Again, the critic does not seem to be aware that he is admitting all and considerably more than the Article criticized ventures to suggest when he says so emphatically that the In Memoriam is "the sincerest and most profoundly personal and self-disclosing monody ever written in any tongue." Thus substituting positive assertion in place of the milder inference of the writer of "A Poetical Heartbreak." If his statement is accept

« AnteriorContinuar »