Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

for scenes as far surpassing those that we have hitherto seen, as the beauty of the present world excels the dreary and desolate aspect of the Azoic ages. Science and Scripture concur in saying that Man does not belong to the past, but to the future. To that future they bid him look, and for that future they tell him to prepare.

The CHAIRMAN.-In asking you to return your thanks to the author of this Paper and also to Mr. Walter Brodie for reading it, I may observe that Dr. Gladstone's Paper, which is to follow, is of such a cognate character, that, unless any one wishes now to make some observations upon the Paper just read, I think it will be more convenient to take the discussions on both papers together. (Hear, hear.)

The following Paper was then read :--

ON THE MUTUAL HELPFULNESS OF THEOLOGY AND NATURAL SCIENCE. By JOHN HALL GLADSTONE, Esq., PH. D., F.R.S., Mem. Vict. Inst.

M

AN, God's child, is put to school in this world, and among the books which he has to study is the varied volume of Nature. There he finds endless pictures to arouse his infant wonder; and there, if he read thoughtfully, he may learn much, not only of the mysteries of the universe, but also about the wisdom, power, and goodness of its Architect, and his Father. But this child is a rebellious one, and in order to restore him to the position which he has forfeited, and to reveal more fully the Father's will, message after message has been sent him from on high. In the book of Nature he finds a multitude of facts which he combines as he best can, and the result is Natural Science: in the volume of grace he finds a number of facts and statements, from which he builds up Theology. The lessons in either department, as God gives them, can scarcely be conceived as otherwise than absolutely true; but as apprehended by man, they are necessarily subject to human error; and thus his systems of Theology and Natural Science must always admit of correction and enlargement.

In this essay I propose to confine my attention to these two parts of man's curriculum-the knowledge of Nature and the knowledge of God; and I shall endeavour to show in what way they are mutually helpful.

The great difference between the two books is in the subject treated of; the resemblance is in their indications of the character and mind of their Author.

They tell of different things. The book of Nature appeals to the bodily senses, and the whole of its teaching relates to the physical universe, and to this life. It knows nothing of the spirit, and its destinies. The Bible, on the other hand, never professes to teach Natural Science. Its words, of course, are coined from natural objects and actions, and it makes large use of Nature in the way of illustration; but its subject matter is the moral law of God, the way of salvation, and eternal life. It is not in this direction, therefore, that we need look for much mutual confirmation, nor need we fear much disagreement.

The two books, however, as was just stated, resemble each other in their indications of the character and mind of their Author. Nature leads us up to the conviction of a Supreme Intelligence; the Bible assumes His existence from the beginning. The unity of design that runs through the universe bespeaks the oneness of its Maker; in the Bible we read, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord." Nature shows us the superabundant evidence of power; the Holy Scriptures call God "Almighty." Our proudest achievements in natural knowledge are but the disclosing of a higher wisdom; the sacred writers stand amazed at "the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God." The philosopher and the inspired apostle agree that "in Him we live and move and have our being," and alike recognize His constant sustaining energy. In our study of the universe we come to a profound conviction of the uniformity of law; Jehovah declares, "I change not;" and even miracles appear in the Bible as part of the working out of a foredetermined plan. The terribleness of the Most High is seen alike in the world and on the page of inspiration. His justice and His goodness may be gathered, though somewhat uncertainly, from the book of Nature; but they are clearly revealed in His word. It is only when our accusing conscience forces the question of His mercy, and makes us doubt the possibility of His favour, that Nature is silent, and we turn to those better oracles which unfold to us the scheme of redemption, and assure us that "God is love."

There is also another kind of resemblance between the two books of Nature and Revelation, which springs from their having the same Author, and which I may, perhaps, be allowed to term the analogy of style. In both we find facts given abundantly, but no scientific systems; in both there is a wonderful unity of plan in diversity of operation; in both there is a frequent recurrence of types-that is, of the same Divine idea repeated, perhaps many times, but modified to suit the

altered circumstances. In both, too, we find a gradual development in time, the later additions being not mere additions, but also evolutions of that which preceded, and ever tending to what is more comprehensive and better. It would take me too long to work out and illustrate these points of analogy; indeed each might be the subject of an essay. I mention them because they have a direct bearing upon part of my future argument.

If there be truth in the statements hitherto made, we shall be fully prepared to find that the study of Nature and of the Sacred Scriptures are mutually helpful. I propose considering the subject under the three heads of Natural Theology, Evidences of Christianity, and Methods of Interpretation.

I. NATURAL THEOLOGY.-It is needless to say much on this head, for this is a department of Divinity which depends wholly, as its name imports, on the study of Nature. The pious in all ages have loved to trace the hand of God in the visible creation, and in doing so they have only followed the example of the inspired Psalmist, or have learned of Him who "answered Job out of the whirlwind "-of Him who on the Galilean mount drew lessons from "the birds of the air," and "the lilies of the field."

This habit of noticing the indications of the Supreme Intelligence may be of service also to the philosopher in his scientific pursuits. Thus, to take an illustration, a physiologist examining an eye will see its exquisite adaptation to the properties of light and the purposes of vision; but he may come across some muscle the use of which is not evident, or such an organ as the tapetum lucidum of the cat, and the conviction that this also has some "final cause" will probably lead him to discover the part it plays in perfecting the mechanism of sight.

Under this head of Natural Theology, may be mentioned another important service which the fuller study of Nature renders to true religion,-it clears away much rubbish; for science is the foe to superstition. The unknown or ill-understood forces of Nature beget a vague fear in the minds of the ignorant; the movements in the world around them appear the actions of spiritual beings; a roaring waterfall, a black damp cavern, a tree waving its branches in the moonlight, the sun beaming forth heat and splendour-each is inhabited by some mysterious agent, and the character of this spirit takes its hue from the character of the mind that imagines it. If the untaught man be gentle and comparatively innocent, the spirit will be a nymph or a fairy; if he be mischievous, a satyr or an elf; and if he be wicked, the mysterious being will be a demon as

licentious or as malignant as himself. I need not remind you of the multitude and variety of false religions which have these fancies for their basis. All such ghosts vanish at the sunrise of scientific truth. No man taught in modern science can any longer believe the statement of the Hindoo scriptures, that heavenly cows hurl the destructive thunderbolt"; nor, as the lightning flashes around him, will his fear embody itself in the picture of Thor wielding his mighty hammer, or Jupiter Tonans grasping a handful of lightnings. In the mighty electric discharge he sees only one manifestation of a force which pervades all Nature, and is convertible into other forces, the varied exponents of that one Supreme Will whose wisdom ordained and whose power sustains the whole.

II. EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.-Natural Theology is not Christianity its deductions may be perfectly true, and yet the Jewish and Christian Scriptures may be false. It seems to me, however, that the study of Nature has something also to say to this question, and that in more ways than one.

The accordance of the character of God, as we find it described in the Bible, with that deduced from Nature, is itself an argument in favour of the truth of Revelation.

The fact that the same difficulties which meet us in Revelation have their analogues in the world of sense, as shown by Bishop Butler and others, not merely serves to stop the mouths of objectors, but is of some value in establishing a common origin.

But there is a more important issue. Science sweeps away the rubbish of superstition ;-is what we deem sacred truth likewise doomed to disappear? Facts seem against such a supposition. The present century, which has seen so wondrous an extension of physical science, is marked by an increase of religious earnestness; and it seems to me that, notwithstanding some great and peculiar perils, our age has the healthy sign of a more intelligent and painstaking desire to arrive at the true meaning of the Word of God than characterized any earlier period of the Church's history. If, moreover, we turn from the effect of Natural Philosophy on an age to its effect on individuals, do we really find that the pursuit of science overthrows the belief in the Divine origin of what is recorded in the sacred writings of the Jews and Christians? By no means. A singularly large proportion of the highest men of science of this and preceding times have been devout believers, or, at least, have acknowledged the truth of the Scriptures; while, if we descend to men of the second or third ranks, we find-at least in my experience-about the same proportion of Christians as in most other professions. It is true there are scientific men

who are infidels, and at the close of last century we saw on the Continent of Europe the sad spectacle of French Encyclopædists, and other learned men, labouring to extinguish the little faith that was then to be found in the world; but it remains to be inquired whether these men were not infidels before they were philosophers; and subsequent events have shown that they raised their pæan before they had won their victory; for the Bible is read now far more than it was then, and Christ has His disciples in the halls of Continental as well as British

science.

And it has not been for want of will on the part of infidels that our Sacred Writings have remained the firm foundation of the faith of Christendom. As science after

science has risen into notice, they have ransacked its storehouse in search of something which they could forge into a new weapon against the old book; and even the guardians of the faith have sometimes been the first to brand some new scientific doctrine as unscriptural, or to decry the whole investigation as irreligious. As time has gone on, it has occasionally happened that the scientific doctrine proved to be a crude and erroneous conclusion; or the suspicious theory being established, it has been found that what it opposed was merely the view of some Jewish commentator or Christian poet.

The history of astronomy is instructive in this respect. When it was contended that the earth, instead of being a flat plain was a round ball, with people walking on the other side of it, the idea was denounced as unscriptural and preposterous. After this was generally received, the Copernican theory of the solar system was promulgated, and then monks preached against the new heresy, and the authorities of the Church passed these two resolutions :-" 1st. The proposition that the sun is the centre of the world, and immovable from its place, is absurd, philosophically false, and formally heretical; because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scripture. 2nd. The proposition that the earth is not the centre of the world, nor immovable, but that it moves, and also with a diurnal motion, is absurd, philosophically false, and theologically considered at least erroneous in faith." When, however, these propositions were universally taught, even at the Roman observatory, the immense magnitudes and distances of the stars were looked upon with suspicion as reducing our globe to a mere speck in the universe, although it is the theatre of man's probation, and of the Son of God's great sacrifice. But no educated man doubts these conclusions now, and in many a sermon, as in Dr. Chalmers's

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »