, 1880-05-16

10 not warrant 0it tue CONCLUSIONS, Or rather
bis duty to Know that the Gar
winian, and Spcucerian - theories hive nothing
and as Il 1ogicinn it was his duty to distinguish
In the doctrine OF evolution the elements OF
truth from the elements Of error. But Prof.
Huxley and many Of the modern scientists do
not pretend to be iogicians, philosophers, and
theolo9fnns; yet they would leave the field Of
| observation and experiment, and as philosophers
and theo1ogians render an nccouut Of the or
igin, the principles, and meaning OF the cosmic
facts they observe and classify Habituated to
look or deny an order Of facts as reai. is evi-
dent. rs certain as any Of the physical facts
which they have laid open to the eye. Their
and exclude the more elevated and universal
convictions Of tho race. Let these scientists
view Nature as It is and in It's sntirety let them
cr1minate accurately between what they really do
| observe and what they only infer from the fncts
1tb
| those facts; let them cease to be unduly intiu-
enced sa BY my prejudiees Or theories 10 record
proper weight flor who will not be able to obtain
| facts In support Of hts opinion, however er-
roneousG; let them admit no conclusions which
nre bronder than their premises: and when thus
| they shall have opened to themselves some
glimpses OF the real order OF the universe, they
narrowmindedncss. it is against this narrow arrow
mtndedness OF scientists that theoloetans and
| philosophers expend their denunctatons: to nc
opposing
OF the sciences fs gross mistake and an I'M
| mcrjted cn1umny.
| Again, il theolo1ians denouuce !. modern phys
lcal science" as atheistic, is 1t .logsh to ward
| OF the charge by denying that "Nuture - or the
study Of Nature is atheistic? At all times have
the Holy Scriptures, the Church, and all theo-
loginns tauyht that Nature is a revelation OF
God, rs true as the supernatural revelation, and
that The invisible things Of Him from the trta
! ton Of the world are clearly seen, being UNDER
stood by the things that arc made But when,
under the guse Of SCIENCE and free thought
social standing, like Ralph Waldo Emerson aud
bis disciples, like Charies Darwin, Sir John Lub-
hook, Profs: Huxley and Tynda!l, Herbert spen-;
other leaders Of the scientific mob. ind great
number Of tho medical profession, are daily and
hourly propagAttng ntheism. open or disguised,
how can tie Ropsiar Science @ Monthia be 5usti-
sneo Y 1@Spresedted @ BY such men Is Atheist, Atheist
Sy reeatug Cod and bis creati1e act to the
lnknowable, for it il as much atheism to DECLARE
He Is IN atheist who is not theist, and no Que
Is theist who does not assert and hold that God
Is and Is Creator Of the heavens and the earth,
Que can do if God and His creative act arc alb
s0lutely unknOwnble or even unknown. He de-
PIES God who Identities Vs.: Hin WITH the Or
underlying reality OF tho cosmic phenomena, a.
oaF DO gndenia9ly @ the g cosqists II We may take
Spencer himself as authority.
And II the great majority OF our modern scien-
fists are decidedly athelstfc. will they find
quoted by the Popular Science Monthiy3 Is it
logical to lind a subterfugc in his distinction
Ssbep Ps
ery so called, is compelled by its very nature TO
take no account of tho being OF God; as soon as
to be physical science. Il night. coin in sea new
word, l should say that science WIS athcous, and
therefore could not be atheistic,-that is to say,
q invRlfjrHffr q
ment c0nversant simply with observed facts and
conclusions drawn from them, and in this sense
this !: The progrcss Of liberal and rational the
wo1ld call attention? Fho distinction that
tie ts od sh & Sf' sssas Ra our payss
soens RroRsFy% % Is not scy
ing in the footsteps OF Plato and Aristotle,
divided tho scientific knowledge to which man
Logic and ethics; physical science, which ia:
.estiRates the sensible facts and phenomena Of
Nature and their laws; mathematics. which
physics or philosophy which. resting on the
strates the Nature OF things, the cause Of the
cause Of nature itsef- II now we take physical
science in this restricted sense. it be said to
be atheous, Or without recognition Of God? By
no means. Physical science, in this restricted
sense, deals directly only with the phenomenal
that Is to say with sensible facts and their tAw5;
that are produced. and in experiment forces
Nature to oetray her secrets. Dutwhy learn the
secrets that lie concealed in air and sen, IN
the starry v,lult above our heads and In tho
prolific bowels of the earth under our feet?
Simply for the sake Of knowledge, or to enable
material advantage from this knowledge? Fnr
from it. Pbysical science has higher aim. Tho
principal and the only necessary md essential
object and design Of physical science III study
ing the phenomenal or sensible e9ects OF Nat
t se ss%sss aee tso q
brought % light, Physical science is NO
21oSedso sn5sst ana Of shings 0i oy '' er
L ix metaPhyscs Or Ph9sophy M Nsns wheh e dsaws
he knowledge OF the nature Of things. and,
rom the knowledge Of Nature. the scicnce OF
ciencc. I therefore, to be science md to Be tr,,e
0 itself, must ayow and profess itself subortli-
lata and subserrient TO metaphysics or philoso-
a}ural theology; for the science of Nature is
he knowledge OF Nature by its ultimate cause
'hysicnl science, therefore. is the handmaid OF
aust be to serve and coOpcrnte with theology,
er mistress and queen. The facts OF Naturcafv
he words OF God to intelligent beings: in every
hysical science institutes for their fuller UNDER
landing It must have for its openly declared
OJeC< tD HsatA W IQ6 AHO"lCuKt OF NnLufE, IN Or
cr to arrive ut the knowledge Of God How.
1en. can science be atheouA or without recoRni-
on Ut God2 How can it be trut, that physical
,ience is by its very nature compelled to tako
0 account OF the being Of Godi True, God il
e ot the direct object Of physical science IL its
ssentially tts indirect and mediate object7 Win
be replied that - As soon as physical science
akes @ account OF the being Of Goa it trenches
pom theology and ceases to be physical
ctence"? But. in the name Of Logic, II we dis
nguish the sciences at NIL, we arc not allowed
} separate them as independent. Reel
elcnce is the expression OF Nuturo. md
azure is one, and everything In Nature points
vowedly to the centre and ultimate cause OF
U: God; the sciences therefore must be one in
wing union and subordlnutton anu have for
heir avoWed and professed object to lead to tho
lller knowledge and service OF God.
But IL we take physical science, as Is now COM
lonly done- In a wider sense, as tho study and
:ience Of Nature or Of Gud's cread dou, its pEin-
pnl and essential, and direct object Is undo
iably the knowledge OF God, the first Gauss and
ltimate end OF all; for science is the knowledge
{ things BY the last and ultimate cause. How
'uthful then and how coherent is the following
OF the Popular Science AonihtV:
There Ia no doubt that tho growth Of phya4