The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1877-06-29
COMM NCEMENT
rlIILADELPIIiAN SOCIETY

opening prayer ana tne cnOlr rendered.
music appropriate to the occasion.
The speaker selected for his text, or an
nounced that it would be his text if he
were to have one, the words of Paul to
Timothy: go Timothy, keep that which
is committed to thy trust, avoiding pro-
fame and vain babblings and oppositions
of science falsely so called" He dis
cussed modern science aud its relations
to the Christian religion. He remarked |
that true knowledge is q gift of the |
spirit, an adjunct of the gospel of
Christ. But the popular way of speak
ing of science, literature and culture as
if they were Independent of and supe-
rior to religion he did not approve. He
would not detract from the value and
importance of scientific research. It'll
had done much in the way of shedding
light upon the scriptures, and aided in
their Interpretation. He would not de-
ny the facts which scientific men offer
for these facts are part of Gods truth,
his revelation written upon the pages
of nature. But while accepting their
facts he would not therefore accept their
theories. The facts and experience of
religion rest upon precisely the same
basis which the facts and laws OF science
rest upon, namely, experiment. When
man says that two classes of truth,
tested in precisely the same way, are
opposed, and that l must choose this
and reject that, reply that this is mere
arbitrary selection, not argument, and
holds as strongly against the conclusions
of the obiector as against revealed relig-
ion. We should remember that science
is not the exclusive prerogative of the
man who inquiries into the facts and
laws of nature, for science is systemat-
lied knowledge, and other knowledge
i may be systematized than the facts and
laws of matter. Christianity is older
than science, and the matter about
which such science is exclusively con-
cerned. Christianity was not ali after
thought with Coda sort of immaterial
tail to material kite--a kind of codicil
to the divine will, but was thought of
when Christ was thought of, before the
remote morning in the eternity which
no finite mind can measure back TO its
beginning. Christianity was part of
Gods plan as much as the universe of
things. And we hope to show that the
law In both cases is an intelligent will,
and that will in both cases the Divine
will.
The objection is made against the BIZ
BILE that IL contains records of events
which are unhistOric and violate all law,
and are unreasonable. BY law these
directors must mean the course of ma
ture. Ry this term, the course of ma
ture, they must mean either the order
of the universe, including not only ma
terial laws whose operations appear,
but also the Divine will and power; OF
it must mean merely those visible phe-
nomena which are attributable to the
. regular and orderly forces of nature
z whose presence can be clearly traced
g or it must mean nothing. The first can
not be intended, for if they admit the
Divine presence among the forces OF
D nature, they admit the supernatural in
: denying 1t. 1t must then be understood
that by the term "Course of Nature
must be meant the orderly and regular
: action Of the forces of nature, produc
t ing results with such uniformity of sue
+ cesison that this action is called law.
!, So when they talk about a thing be
ing reasonable or unreasonable: every
II process of reasoning for the purpose o
o finding the exact truth implies a limita
6 ton, something beyond which has no
yet been discovered. 4 mind capable
. of knowing all which can be known i
II of unlimited faculties and its knowledg,
( is absolute. Then, unless following rea
! son implies limitation of our faculties
those who claim to follow it and objec
10 to the gospel because ii is unreasonable
10 talk nonsense. But if this does impl,
limitation, then the objeotor admits b.
his objection and in urging it, that Their
!, is still something reasonable which Ia
:, has not discovered. For if not, Their
l. can be no such thing as rationalisln, ant
e he can mean nothing. If a man reason
e he admits there is a reason Of things
,. that things are reasonable and unrea
sonable. And if we can know nothin
+ beyond these facts how can we say Their
l. is nothing beyond them, and that wha
10 is beyond is unreasonable. For to sa
T, that it is so, is to assume to know wins
!" he declares we do not know. The me
'e ment he denies the supernatural, he b(
K gins to reason about what is beyond th
n. order of nature, of which he declare
1, 81 we have and can have no knowledge, S
- virtually recognizes what he has denied
Sc that there may be something superna
ks ural, above nature, which may be rel
al sonable. Then to say that the supel
!, natural in the religion of Jesus make
VI 1t unreasonable and unworthy of adol
ID ton, is equal to assuming knowledg
of beyond the facts of nature which ii
n. objector denies,
al Secondly, to apply some especial ties
:, to this objection TO religion, founde
IL on facts Of its supernatural narrative
The declarations of the Bible may |
contrary TO the reason of in6delity, bl
H. not TO the sublime reason of faith. The
,s. may violate all the law which sept
cism has discovered, but not all the la
VI which faith has discovered. The mat
cd terisl law of to-day may not be the act
at al material law ofto-morrow. Becau
mi finite mind is baffied when it approac
es the infinite, shall the finite therefor
ei- deny the existence of the infinite?
W. The truth Of a statement may depel
Ice on conditions not Immediately know
MS to the mind. If two facts are true Sc
N. arately, they must be true together, al
-. the failure to discover their point
Tx agreement does not prove that there
1t none. Their ground of agreement m,
Ire lie too deep for any finite mind to fat
ofl ON. Ii does not follow that the scri
" lures are not true because men cam
eh adjust them by the measurements
icy human reason. Ii Is more absurd
nd deny some things than to believe thei
nd even if we do not understand them.
"o Thirdly. The objection that the Bit
her contains record of supernatul
ion events, is absurd. Claims are made
his the directors that are quite as irreco
.ho cilable with the known and univeri
.u' laws of nature as the scripture accoul
ar- can be. 1t is not by the "known a
etc universal laws of nature" nor by sec
nv slant experience" that they conclu
~ that Webster, Sumner or an Ever
a,o are but points reached in the upwa
.hc process Of development from the al
lon But II does accord with our consts
'or, experience that the lesser laws are
,ro. the time held in restraint by higl
laws without being annihilated.
al ~ ootto,, of tha louT Of o,ra,y;tat;o,,