New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-07-17
NE w PUBLICATIONS.


sTUDIEs ~ TIE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION AID
Lowell & Co.
The most important religious problems which
command the attention OF philosophical thinkers at the
present DAY are here treated with oarnestuess and
ability. Among tho topics considered by the author are
the Genesis and Development Of the idea Of God, the
Relation Of Thesm To Scientific Speculation" the " Be
lief IN Immortality and the "Placc OF the ludo Euro
peau ard Semitic Races in history" He finds his starting
point in general autagonism which now prevails in
the scientific aud rel Cious conceptions Of tie world
The passagcatams between certain leaders in science
and leaders theology he suggests may easily nc
overated for the worlds decisive battles have not been
fought by careernc and trumpeug knighserrant; hut
hardly overrate the state OF conflict or mental
schsm in which every devout man who Is also man
Of culture, feels himse: compelled more or less con
scousiy 70 His mind il in which two con-
cepons struggle For the mastery faith sacrificed TO
Inowledge or knowledge faith The age alive per
haps morhidy the mtitacsis Of science and religion
On the hand Science cOnccvos setevoved Universe
made up iudestruchie forces and convertible into inf
nitely varied modes Of being and action Religion, on
the other hand oonocyCs tie world he work oil vol
untay Creator and Nature the arena of perpetual
Divine operation. Science charges upon Theology the
assumption q tickle and irregular action upon Nature
b. an external power. Theology returns Che reproach
by accusing Science Of seeking TO evolve an IN
caused Universe or to reduce the Divine con
nee
Under these circumstances. the author contends eonc
alton is impossible by dividing the respective provinces
Of science ana religion since the point contested belongs
Justly 10 both The highest truth OF religion l. the N''-
mate problem Of science. The ono lives by aiih N
Creator the other lives TO discover Cause Man cannot
live either by rel on science alone Both are ueces-
sar alike 10 the individual and 70 society. The truth that
shalt reconcile the two Is lot to be found by silence on
either side, by the mutual and frank criticism Of
physicist and met0physcaD. Nr. Fairharn eude3NoIa
20 contribute his share towards this (ecircsseWe by
an impartial survey and calculation OF the d.tcieit
aspects Of each side Of Tire question lie arrives at the
conclusion that while every adequate Interpretation OF
Nature involves its causal force The Creator ana TIE
Universe cannot be conceived as divided INDEPENDENT or
mutually exclusive. Tue HGiprG H0tudi0 ana the manu-
ro nafuGnS. 10 the terms OF Spinoza arc d.sllh
guislmble in idea. but not divshlc in reality Hence
Scientist ana Ihest mast agree that neither can 50 DIS
tngush as dlsOin Nature anc lis Cause 10 conceive
God a ousdc and apart from the Universe is to conceive
the highest mental abstraction, bat no real being no
positiye ami efficient entity. when God is conceived
a Creator nc must be conceived as related
md immaneuce in the creation not only eX
presses his mode OF creative action. but Is the only
form OF thought which reconcile the anttheuc
notions Of Tie absolute and the relative Hence II God
and Nature stand related to each other his action and
the acton Of Mature he distinguished rcspec-
lively supernatural ana natural Wherever Nature
works God works There IS point in the Universe
without bis presence, cloud 10 his energies. In this
exposition the author does intend to cast doubt upon
the doctrine u evolution Modern thought lie afirns,
Is too d,ry penetrated with this idea allow s
eluslon IRON any scientific speculative conception Of
The Universe Hcccl was before Darwin, ana evolution
was known to mctapa long before il was adopted by
phys!cs Evolution science need not tarte usany more
than evolution ia philosophy The genesis of form
not explained when It is shown how II came 10 Ice, but
only vixen what caused to lie is made evident EYou
ton has done tic one but the other II has simp
fed our notion creatona method but not of the
creaonal cause Herbert Spencer the author contends,
has failed OF an ultimate solution by seeking 10 veil the
presence the Creator n the obscuriy Of the WEnow
able. Tie unkuOWablc, the inscrutabie Power is Ike
a dead mask cOnceaing ahyng face, ghastly cyesOchc
without eye Let The mask hc removed that the face
NAV be seen qs the face of the Living God" his IS
the fuel drift OF the reasoning OF the author IL
his attempt % explain the problem OF the Universe In
Tie prosecution OF tho wck it must be said, he is more
ingenious than conclusive and suggestive rather than
profound. He hctrys an intimate acquaintance with the
development Of piloSopc thought, bu. shows no re-
rarkshle power as pnlOsoplc thinker. lie is evil
IDENTITY inspired with love OF truth bat possesses
no peculiar gifts for discovery His forte Is exp0sl
ton and Illustration rather than invention, and he Justly
claims the rank seeker. rather than OF founder
He viii form epoch in tie history Of ideas, hut the
student Of philosophy VII recognize him faithful and
conscientious felow-studost IN the same field