The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1878-02-15
1IENCE AND RELIGION.
ASSUMPTIONS OF SCIENCE AND
OF THEOLOGY.
Al New Churchman's View OF the
Subject In Response TO Rev. J. &.
ArmstroDg's Able Article.
.,orrespondence of the Register.


Whatever may have been the prevailing
sentiment in q former age, at the present
day when, in the words of Emanuel
'Swedenb borg, at is now permitted to en-
ter intellectually into the mys!er les oi
,fsith," so admirable an argument and
one conducted in spirit at on ce so rev.
erential and yet severely logical
should, it seems to me. meet with
only the grateful approval of all conser-
vative theologisns, or those who desire 10
see belief in the supernatural still pre-.
served to mankind unshattered by the
assaults now made upon it by the votar-
les of self-cresting matter. 1t is certain
ly known to your able contributor that
the discussion as TO these assumptions, or
the necessity of q priori truths, or prin-
ciples accepted as truths, is not new one.
Kant. in the last century, has shown, l
think, conclusively, in his "Crit.que Of
the Pure Reason" in the chapter on the
Ideal Of Pure Reason (Transcendental
DiaIectics; book III. chap. lily that
while the pure reason can not OF it,
self suthorita,ively assert Di-
vine Being, yet it neither
can deny such, and that only by asserting
il does it obtain plan or method by
which all the laws and phenomena OF
the Universe, both of mind and matter,
may be reduced to unity and hsr-
mony. In his remarkable words: "lt
it can be shown that these ideas (namely
of God, the Soul, and first cause al.
though not relating directly to any OBJ
ject or determining it, do nevertheless,
on the supposiiton Of the existence OF an
ideal object, produce systematic unity IN
the Laws of the empirical employment OF
the reason and attend our empirical cog
our being inconsistent
Or ID opposition with it,-iL must
be necessary marin of reason
to regulate its procedure according to
these ideas"
Which amounts to this, in simpler
terms, that the reason can neither deny
God nor assert God, Of itself, with abso-
lutte certainty, but in assuming that there
is God, it not only is enabled to har-
lnonize all its conclusions from expert
ence or scientific observation, but also Is
assisted in reaching these very observs-
tions themselves.
The main outcome, however, Of all
such discussions in their theological bear
ing, Is not the amount Of proof which
hey offer of the being OF God, but in
their negative concluSion-namely that
no man is able from reason or scieRce TO
DTOve that there IS no God!
This is the utmost positive achievement
Of the pure reason in the domain Of the
Ology. Whence comes our knowledge OF
God2 The answer is and can only be
from Revelation God the Infinite and
10 Himself unknowable can only be
known as He reveals himself to finite
minds. But here Science opposes two
questions. First, can the Unknowsble
reveal Himself to human knowledge, or
can the Infinite be known by finite
minds? The answer to this will depend
upon what is meant by infinite. lfr
means that which has no determined or
lednabe being, or in other words moth
ina, then we will admit that OF nothing,
nothing can be known. But
if bv in finite we mean some
positive substance or beng not inited or
limited by material measurements, then
we will assert that the infinite can be
known and perceived aud felt; nay, that
IN every impulse of pure love or benevo-
ence, and In every glimpse OF real
ruth person actually perceiyes and
knows the Infinite. God Is infinite; but
infinite ohat7 Infinite space, or height
or depth, or atomic matter or cellular
issue? No. But infinite Love and in
inIte Wisdom; and infinite love and in
Unite wisdom can be known By man il
Ire is kno,cn and movable, for all life is
nothing else than Divine love and Wis
iom in their operation in the various
planes or degrees OF the Universe, spirit
lal and natural.
Will the scientist tell US that life is not
infinite? But il life is infinite, is 1t not
It the same time kuowsble? And if 1t
s movable then is not its source, or He
Who is life itself knowsble? AS to Life
being in its essence Love and Wisdom
which constitute the being OF
God, see Emanuel Sweden borg's
work on the Divine Lore and Wisdom.
part l, where it is proved that the
lie Of man is his love, and that the life
IF the Universe Is the love of God IN Its
various planes of procedure snd opera
ion, extending even into the atmos-
pheric or mineral elements of nsturel.
But secondly, the Scientist objects-if
-evesled Divine truths are admitted
which are not capable ofscienhfc proof,
hen they will dissrrsnge or conflict
with and disturb the deductions OF pure
science, or render them uncertain. But
Kant has shown that the opposite is the
,sse, and that no scientific Investigations
,aa possibly Be carried on, of whatever
kind, leading to conclusions, without the
admission OF certsin a priori truths or
raxims taken for granted. Lastly, the
.ruths OF revelation mast necessarily be
u harmony with sll truths Of science,
or truths which are truths cannot but
accord. And the vital question of this
.ge Of the New Science and the New
Church upon which We are entering, is
what are the real truhts OF Revelation,
md Whist are the real truths, and not the
mere guesses and arbitrary assertions, of
Science?
Sweden borg declares that the Bible
5 Gods revelation of Divine truth 10
men, but that it's resl and true meaning,
md thus it's essentially Dirine truths, are
in the letter only symbolicslly,
,ut reslly in the internal or spiritusl
ense contained within the letter; and
hese truths OF the spiritual sense Of the
Bible sre nowhere in conflict with. but
.sther everywhere only illuminate and
confirm, sll the trueinductions Of science.
Respectfully yours,
FRANK SEwALL-
nresiden. Urbana University, Ur6dnG, o.
February llth, 1878.
49,