New Orleans Republican., 1868-01-19

The Law of Human Progress.
We begin to have faith. One OF the
ablest orthodox religious papers in The
country, the New York Methodist, comes to
us this week containing the following
thoughts upon the law of progress. We
call the Methodist an orthodox paper, and
presume its editor and proprietors would
feel indignant were VIC to call it anything
else. But what would the paper have been
called one generation ago if it had pub
lished its present theory Of the law of prog
ress. The most conclusive proof to us Of
the existence of such law is the present
position of the Methodist. We presume,
however, it would deny the sweep of the
law in all its logical severity, and perhaps
await another generation before it steps
beyond its present position. May the
Methodist enter every religious circle in the
land notwithstanding;
One of the most important means of the
safety and prosperity Of public bodies is a
knowledge of their law of fsel!-develOpment,
and the practical conformity Of their policy
to this law. Geology proves that in the
physical world progressive succession is
the order Of the Creator; through uncount-
ed ages we see this law operating inyiDci-
bly, from the lowest forms of organic life
up to the Vertebrated type, crowned by the
human being. History shows that the in
telligent world is subject to the same order,
and the decay and decadence Of nations and
churches can be traced to a misapprehen-
sion or misdireetiOn of this divine law.
Some Of the profoundest thinkers have
pointed out as the chief cause of public de-
generation and OF disastrous revolutions
the fact that given ages have fixed unalter-
ably their opinions orpoliey, assuming that
they were absolutely, that is to say, uR-
ehangeably, true
How full of the demonstrations of this
view is the history Of the human mind.
How full Of proofs of the ultimate impo-
tence, yet temporary disasters, of any op-
position to this invariable law of progress
Within the period of the pupilage of most
of us, it was supposed that we had the final
theory of heat or ealorie; and we really
had a large amount Of relative truth about
it-that is, knowledge true relatively to
our progress. We supposed heat to be an
entity, an essence, per SC, though we could
not define Il. We could collect il in a
focus, could reflect and refraot it, and even
analyze it by the prism. II anything in
natural science seemed demonstrated, it
was this. Black, the Edinburgh chem
ist, reduced its phenomena to even
mathematical expression, and Watt applied
his figures with mechanical certainty to the
greatest invention in the history Of man
But within a few years we have found
reason to change our whole theory of its
essential nature. We have resolved it at
last into motion, and the grand doctrines
Of the correlation and conservation of force
have entered into cur scientific system.
The whole theory Of the "imponderable
agents" has been revolutionized. Our
former knowledge of the subject was 80
far relatively true that we could explain
most Of the phenomena of heat by it; we
had, indeed, the truth relatively, but not
absolutely. We have now approximated
nearer to the absolute truth, and with mag
niaeent results. There is hardly name,
If indeed single one, Of scientific author
ity that does not endorse the new theory,
or rather the new demonstration.
What, now, would have been the result of
the old hypothesis Of heat, had it been i'm
mutually decreed in formula, had it been
made fatal heresy to change It.? To
certain degree The intellectual universe
would have been arrested at this point.
The Ptolemaic theory Of astronomy bad
much relative truth. It's cycles and epicy-
oles explained many of the cosmicai phe-
nomena; but the system of Copernicus sup
planted It, PtOlemy erred in respect to a |
grand, absolute trnth-the centse Of our as
trenomlc system, placing the earth where
the sun is. And what an error was this I |
Suppose the scientific world, or The church,
had decreed his system to be the FINAL truth, |
what an arrest Of the human intellect
would this have been Neither did so, IL
any formal manner, but both did SO taeitly. |
and when the C0pernioaR doctrine was an
nounced the church attempted to prescribe
the newly discovered truth in the person
Of Calico. The church has never yet re-
covered from the disgrace Of that fact
nothing has perhaps more effectively bro
ken It's claim to intatlibilitr, or to any FINAL
anfhoFity over opinion than that angra-
eisus exaAiple Of CONSERVATISM. The |
scientific world has never siRce ceased 70
re.eeho against ifa iplefdiction of Galileo's
reaponse. EpsB' 81 muope (and yet il movesl,
and name a0W fear bis tate Of the dungeons
Of the inquiaia0a. and q three years repe-
tltlon Of the penilential psalms
me specific 1isceveries mentioned ere
grand IN themselves. ioF they make eYss ID
scientific pre1rasa But theq have led 10 4
greater discovery; they aexioustrate ne
law ef progress, they hats instituted the
freedom Of inquiry, the liberty Of tie IN
world. Sud they teach to all |
men g grand practical Lesson
Ehe true policy ot phllos0phlo schools, the
only condition Of their security and pros
perlsy namely, that they should not only
tolerate hnt promote their own progressive /
liegoiopm9nk
They AaSa 80 interesting hard ciders
case i cgnneclent A few days ago a car