diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-14 18:32:58 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-14 18:32:58 -0700 |
| commit | 44ba2f3b020977ae58bda81c374b8fd4f68a3eb9 (patch) | |
| tree | d6c8bff0dcd85fb22af2e194c8d580661d678ed4 /40342-tei | |
Diffstat (limited to '40342-tei')
| -rw-r--r-- | 40342-tei/40342-tei.tei | 23154 |
1 files changed, 23154 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/40342-tei/40342-tei.tei b/40342-tei/40342-tei.tei new file mode 100644 index 0000000..18e8704 --- /dev/null +++ b/40342-tei/40342-tei.tei @@ -0,0 +1,23154 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> + +<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "http://www.gutenberg.org/tei/marcello/0.4/dtd/pgtei.dtd" [ + +<!ENTITY u5 "http://www.tei-c.org/Lite/"> + +]> + +<TEI.2 lang="en"> +<teiHeader> + <fileDesc> + <titleStmt> + <title>The Freedom of Science</title> + <author><name reg="Donat, Joseph">Joseph Donat</name></author> + </titleStmt> + <editionStmt> + <edition n="1">Edition 1</edition> + </editionStmt> + <publicationStmt> + <publisher>Project Gutenberg</publisher> + <date>July 26, 2012</date> + <idno type="etext-no">40342</idno> + <availability> + <p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and + with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it + away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg + License online at www.gutenberg.org/license</p> + </availability> + </publicationStmt> + <sourceDesc> + <bibl> + Created electronically. + </bibl> + </sourceDesc> + </fileDesc> + <encodingDesc> + </encodingDesc> + <profileDesc> + <langUsage> + <language id="en"></language> + <language id="de"></language> + <language id="la"></language> + <language id="fr"></language> + <language id="it"></language> + </langUsage> + </profileDesc> + <revisionDesc> + <change> + <date value="2012-07-26">July 26, 2012</date> + <respStmt> + <name> + Produced by Dianna Adair, David King, and the Online + Distributed Proofreading Team at <http://www.pgdp.net/>. + (This file was produced from images generously + made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries.) + </name> + </respStmt> + <item>Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1</item> + </change> + </revisionDesc> +</teiHeader> + +<pgExtensions> + <pgStyleSheet> + .boxed { x-class: boxed } + .shaded { x-class: shaded } + .rules { x-class: rules; rules: all } + .indent { margin-left: 2 } + .bold { font-weight: bold } + .italic { font-style: italic } + .smallcaps { font-variant: small-caps } + </pgStyleSheet> + + <pgCharMap formats="txt.iso-8859-1"> + <char id="U0x2014"> + <charName>mdash</charName> + <desc>EM DASH</desc> + <mapping>--</mapping> + </char> + <char id="U0x2003"> + <charName>emsp</charName> + <desc>EM SPACE</desc> + <mapping> </mapping> + </char> + <char id="U0x2026"> + <charName>hellip</charName> + <desc>HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS</desc> + <mapping>...</mapping> + </char> + </pgCharMap> +</pgExtensions> + +<text lang="en"> + <front> + <div> + <divGen type="pgheader" /> + </div> + <div> + <divGen type="encodingDesc" /> + </div> + + <div rend="page-break-before: always"> + <p rend="font-size: xx-large; text-align: center">The Freedom of Science</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">By</p> + <p rend="font-size: x-large; text-align: center">Joseph Donat, S.J., D.D.</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">Professor Innsbruck University</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">New York</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">Joseph F. Wagner</p> + <p rend="text-align: center">1914</p> + </div> + <div rend="page-break-before: always"> + <head>Contents</head> + <divGen type="toc" /> + </div> + + </front> +<body> + +<pb n='i'/><anchor id='Pgi'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Imprimatur.</head> + +<lg> +<l>Nihil Obstat</l> +<l>REMIGIUS LAFORT, D.D.</l> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Censor</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Imprimatur</l> +<l>JOHN CARDINAL FARLEY</l> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Archbishop of New York</hi></l> +</lg> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>New York</hi>, January 22, 1914. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>Copyright, 1914, by Joseph F. Wagner, New York</hi> +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='iii'/><anchor id='Pgiii'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Author's Preface To The English +Edition.</head> + +<p> +The present work has already secured many friends in +German Europe. An invitation has now been extended +for its reception among the English-speaking countries, with +the object that there, too, it may seek readers and friends, and +communicate to them its thoughts—the ideas it has to convey +and to interpret. While wishing it heartfelt success and good +fortune on its journey, the Author desires it to convey his +greetings to its new readers. +</p> + +<p> +This book has issued from the throes of dissension and strife, +seeing the light at a time when, in Austria and Germany, the +bitter forces of opposition, that range themselves about the +shibboleth <emph>Freedom of Science</emph>, were seen engaging in a combat +of fiercer intensity than ever. Yet, notwithstanding, this Child +of Strife has learned the language of Peace only. It speaks +the language of an impartial objectivity which endeavours, in +a spirit of unimpassioned, though earnest, calm, to range itself +over the burning questions of the day—over those great <foreign lang='de' rend='italic'>Weltanschauung</foreign> +questions, that stand in such close relation with the +compendious motto: <emph>Freedom of Science</emph>. Yes, <emph>Freedom</emph> and +<emph>Science</emph> serve, in our age and on both sides of the Atlantic, as +trumpet-calls, to summon together—often indeed to pit in +deadly combat—the rival forces of opposition. They are catch-words +that tend to hold at fever-pitch the intellectual life of +modern civilization—agents as they are of such mighty and +far-reaching influences. On the one hand, Science, whence the +moving and leading ideas of the time take shape and form to +go forth in turn and subject to their sway the intellect of man; +on the other, Freedom—that Freedom of sovereign emancipation, +<pb n='iv'/><anchor id='Pgiv'/> +that Christian Freedom of well-ordered self-development, +which determine the actions, the strivings of the human spirit, +even as they control imperceptibly the march of Science. While +the present volume is connected with this chain of profound +problems, it becomes, of itself, a representation of the intellectual +life of our day, with its far-reaching philosophical questions, +its forces of struggle and opposition, its dangers, and +deep-seated evils. +</p> + +<p> +The Author has a lively recollection of an expression which +he heard a few years ago, in a conversation with an American +professor, then journeying in Europe. <q>Here, they talk of +tolerance,</q> he observed, <q>while in America we put it into practice.</q> +The catch-word <emph>Freedom of Science</emph> will not, therefore, +in <emph>every</emph> quarter of the world, serve as a call to arms, causing +the opposing columns to engage in mutual conflict, as is the +case in many portions of Europe. But certain it is that everywhere +alike—in the new world of America, as well as in the +old world of Europe—the human spirit has its attention engaged +with the same identical questions—those topics of nerve-straining +interest that sway and surge about this same catch-word +like so many opposing forces. Everywhere we shall have +those tense oppositions between sovereign Humanity and Christianity, +between Knowledge and Faith, between Law and Freedom; +everywhere those questions on the Rights and Obligations +of Science, on Catholic Thought, and on Catholic Doctrinal +Beliefs and Duties. +</p> + +<p> +May it fall to the lot of this book to be able to communicate +to many a reader, interested in such topics, words of enlightenment +and explanation—to some for the strengthening of their +convictions, to others for the correction, perhaps, of their erroneous +views. At home, while winning the sympathy of many +readers, it has not failed to encounter also antagonism. This +was to be expected. The resolute championing of the principles +of the Christian view of the world, as well as many a candid +expression of views touching the intellectual impoverishment +and the ever-shifting position of unshackled Freethinking, must +necessarily arouse such antagonism. May the present volume +<pb n='v'/><anchor id='Pgv'/> +meet on the other side of the Atlantic with a large share of that +tolerance which is put into actual practice there, and is there +not merely an empty phrase on the lips of men! May it contribute +something to the better and fuller understanding of +the saying of that great English scientist, <hi rend='smallcaps'>William Thomson</hi>: +<q>Do not be afraid of being free-thinkers! If you think strongly +enough, you will be forced by science to the belief in God, +which is the foundation of all religion.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Finally, I may be allowed to express my sincere thanks to the +publisher for undertaking the work of this translation. +</p> + +<p> +May it accomplish much good. +</p> + +<p> +J. Donat. +</p> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='smallcaps'>University Innsbruck,</hi></l> +<l><hi rend='smallcaps'>Christmas, 1913.</hi></l> +</lg> + +</div> + +<pb n='vi'/><anchor id='Pgvi'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Translator's Note.</head> + +<p> +The German original is replete with references to works +especially in the German language, the author having with +great care quoted title and page whenever referring to an +author. Since many of these references are of value only to +those familiar with the German, they have been abbreviated +or omitted in this English version, whenever they would seem +to needlessly encumber its pages. +</p> + +<p> +Those desirous of verifying quotations will be enabled to do +so in all instances by a reference to the German original. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='001'/><anchor id='Pg001'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>First Section. The Freedom of Science and its +Philosophical Basis.</head> + +<pb n='003'/><anchor id='Pg003'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter I. Science And Freedom.</head> + +<p> +If a question is destined to agitate and divide for considerable +length of time the minds of men, it must undoubtedly have +its root deep in the entire intellectual life of the times; it must +be anchored in profound philosophical thought, in theories of +life. From this source it derives its power of captivating the +minds. All this applies to the question of the Freedom of Science. +If, then, we desire a thorough understanding of this question, +we must first of all seek and examine its deeper lying +philosophical basis; we must trace the threads which so closely +unite it to the intellectual life and effort of the times. +</p> + +<p> +But before we begin our study, let us remember a rule of the +great orator and philosopher of ancient Rome; a rule only too +often forgotten in our times: <q>Every philosophical discussion, +of anything whatsoever, should begin with a definition, in order +to make clear what the discussion is about</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi>, De Officiis, +I, 2). If we would form a judgment as to the demand of science +for freedom, as to the justification of this demand, as to its +compatibility or incompatibility with the duty of faith, the first +question that naturally arises is: What is the purport of this +demand, what does it mean? Only after we have clearly circumscribed +this demand can we approach its philosophical presumptions +and test its basis. +</p> + +<p> +What, then, do we understand by Science, and what freedom +may be granted to it? +</p> + +<div> +<head>Science.</head> + +<p> +When a man of Northern or Central Europe hears of science, +his thoughts generally turn to the universities and their teachers. +<pb n='004'/><anchor id='Pg004'/> +To him the university is the home of science, there its numerous +branches dwell in good fellowship, there hundreds of men have +consecrated themselves to its service. In those parts of Europe +it is customary for men of science to be university professors. +Of what university is he? is asked. Celebrated scientists, like +<hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Liebig</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hertz</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Kirchhoff</hi>; philosophers, like <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Fichte</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Schelling</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Herbart</hi>; great philologists, historians, +and so on, were university professors. +</p> + +<p> +For all that, <emph>science</emph> and <emph>university</emph> are not necessarily +inseparable things. The university needs science, but science +does not absolutely need the university. Science was in the +world before the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the time when +France and Italy built their first universities; and also since +then science has been enriched by the achievements of many a +genius who never occupied a university chair. <hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> belonged to no universities; <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> never taught in the higher schools. In the +countries of Western Europe and America the man of science +and the university professor are to this day not so much identical +in person. Therefore, if the freedom of science applies +<emph>principally</emph> to the higher schools and their teachers, this is +not its exclusive application. Science and university are not +identical terms. +</p> + +<p> +What, then, is science? +</p> + +<p> +At the sound of this magic word there arises in the minds of +many the image of a superhuman being: open on his lap lies +the book of wisdom in which all mysteries are solved; in his +hand is the flaming torch which enlightens the path down into +the lowest depths of research, dispelling all darkness. This, in +the minds of many, is what science means. The mere appeal to +this infallible being suffices to settle all problems, to silence +every contradiction; woe to him who dares open his profane +mouth to utter an If or a But! +</p> + +<p> +Were this science, there would be no dispute. We should +have to admit that there could be no limit set to the freedom +of this being; he must share the privileges of divine Intelligence, +for no command to keep silent can be imposed on Infallible +Truth; there can be no amendment. But, alas! in the world +<pb n='005'/><anchor id='Pg005'/> +of reality this personified Science is nowhere to be found, it +exists solely in the realm of rhetoric and poetry. Science, as it +exists among men, has its seat, after all, nowhere else than in +the human mind. It is, indeed, nothing else but <emph>the well-ordered +summary of knowledge and of the research for +the causes of things</emph>. Natural science is the summary of +knowledge and research in the realm of natural phenomena, +arranged in an orderly way, as a text-book will give it; that is, +an investigation of phenomena and their causes. A mere description +of natural phenomena, without any explanation, or +reference of them to the laws of nature, would indeed be teaching +about nature, but not natural science. Similarly, the science +of history is the well-ordered summary of knowledge and +research in the domain of human events, derived from their +sources, with the statement of facts according to cause and +effect. +</p> + +<p> +And not all this knowledge is certain, and free from doubt. +The modern conception of science, as we now have it—the +ancients had a much narrower conception—includes certain +as well as uncertain knowledge, results and hypotheses, and even +the activity of research, together with its methods. Astronomy +was thus in <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy's</hi> time the summary of what was then +known with more or less certainty about the stars; included in +this, as is well known, was the opinion that the sun circles +around the earth. And the philosophy of <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> embraced his +philosophical ideas about God, the world and man; hence many +errors. Further, when speaking of science in general, we mean +the whole number of the individual sciences. It is the freedom +of science in this sense that we have to investigate here. The +individual sciences are distinguished one from another principally +by the subjects of which they treat. Astronomy is distinguished +from palæontology and philosophy by the fact that it +treats of the stars, not of fossils, or of the fundamental truths +of reason. +</p> + +<p> +From this brief analysis of concepts it is clear that science +and scientific research are not superhuman beings, but an activity +or condition of the human mind, distinguished from the ordinary +thought of the individual only by system and method, and, +<pb n='006'/><anchor id='Pg006'/> +commonly, by greater thoroughness and by the united effort of +many. <emph>It is subject to all the limitations of the human +mind.</emph> +</p> + +<p> +What follows from this? Two things. Let us at once make +a brief reference to both of them, because in our discussion they +are of the greatest importance. +</p> + +<p> +Since, then, science is an activity of the human mind, it must, +like it, always and everywhere be <emph>subject to the Truth</emph> and +<emph>subject to God</emph>. Subject to the Truth: whenever science +comes in contact with it, it must reverently bow to the truth. +And subject to God: if God is the Creator of man and of his +spiritual and bodily activity, He is also the master of his whole +being, and man is subject to Him in all his activity and development, +therefore in his intellectual life, and in his artistic and +scientific pursuits. Everything is and remains the activity of +the <emph>creature</emph>. As gravitation rules the entire planet and its +material activity, attracts it towards the sun and makes it circle +around it, so does the law of dependence on God rule the +whole life of the creature. Man cannot therefore, even in his +scientific research, ignore his Creator, cannot emancipate himself +from His authority; and if God has given a revelation and demands +faith, the man of science, too, must believe. There cannot +be an emancipated, free, science in this sense. +</p> + +<p> +Another consequence is this: since science is an activity of +the human mind, it shares all its <emph>imperfections and weaknesses</emph>. +It is truly flesh of its flesh. The fruit cannot be +more perfect than the tree that produces it, nor the flower better +than the plant on which it blossomed. Now, as the human +mind is throughout limited in its nature, so is it also in its research. +It is not given to man to soar aloft on eagle wings +to the heights of knowledge, thence to gaze upon truth with +unerring intuition; the ascent must be slow, with constant +dangers of stumbling, even of falling headlong. To these +dangers must be added his latent likes and dislikes, which imperceptibly +guide his thought, especially in forming opinions +on questions of the world and of life, which the human heart +cannot view with indifference: they influence his thought. +Hence ignorance, darkness, and error, everywhere accompany the +<pb n='007'/><anchor id='Pg007'/> +investigator individually, and science as a whole, all the more +the loftier the questions that present themselves. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Already the philosopher of the dim past gave expression to the complaint, +that our reason is no more capable of knowing the divine than +the eyes of the owl are of seeing in broad daylight. It is <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> who +so complains. And the great <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, in the evening of his life, thus +estimates the worth of his knowledge: <q>What the world may think +about my labour, I do not know; I feel like a child that plays on the +strand of the sea: now and then I may perhaps find a pebble or shell +more beautiful than those of my playmates, while the boundless ocean +lies ever before me with its undiscovered treasures</q> (apud <hi rend='italic'>O. Zoeckler</hi>, +Gottes Zeugen im Reich der Natur (1906), 173). The same sorrowful +plaint is heard from all serious investigators, especially those in the +domain of the natural sciences, who should have more reason than others +to be proud of their achievements. <q>However great the amount of +human knowledge may seem to the multitude,</q> writes the well-known +chemist <hi rend='italic'>Schoenbein</hi>, <q>the most experienced scientist feels the incompleteness +and patchwork of it, and realizes that man so far has been able to +learn but infinitely little of what nature is, and of what can be known.</q> +<q>The more exact the investigation,</q> says the geologist <hi rend='italic'>Quenstedt</hi>, <q>so +much the more obscure is its beginning. Indeed, the deeper we think +to have understood the single parts, the further the original plan of +the Creator seems to escape us</q> (cf. <hi rend='italic'>Kneller</hi>, Das Christentum und +die Vertreter der neueren Naturwissenschaften (1904), 208, 281). +<q>Although science,</q> so we are assured by another modern savant, +<q>has brought to light many a treasure, still, compared with what we +do not yet know, it is as a drop to the ocean. In all our knowledge there +will always be the danger of error.</q> We are probably not very far in +advance of the time of <hi rend='italic'>Albrecht von Haller</hi>, who said: <q>We, all of us, +err, only each errs in a different way. Every passage that has been illuminated +by science is surrounded by dense darkness; beyond the visible +lies the invisible.</q> And Prof. <hi rend='italic'>J. Reinke</hi> continues: <q>As early as the +day of <hi rend='italic'>Socrates</hi>, the beginning of philosophy was to know that we know +nothing; the end of philosophy, to know that we must believe: such is +the inevitable fate of human wisdom</q> (Naturwissenschaft und Religion, +in Natur und Kultur IV (1907), 418, 425. Printed also separately). +Some years ago Sir <hi rend='italic'>W. Ramsay</hi>, a noted scientist, concluded a +discourse on his scientific labour with the words: <q>When a man has +reached the middle of his life, he begins to believe that the longer he +lives the less he knows! This is my excuse for having molested you +for an hour with my ignorance</q> (Einige Betrachtungen ueber das +periodische Gesetz der Elemente. Vortrag auf der 75. Versammlung +Deutscher Naturforscher und Ærzte zu Cassel (1903)). +</p> + +<p> +If science, then, can only with difficulty lift from visible nature the +veils that hide the truth—and even this is often beyond its power—no +wonder it is confronted with still greater obstacles when it approaches +the truths that are beyond visible nature. Moreover, it is an old truth +that here it is led not by reason only, but also, and even more energetically, +<pb n='008'/><anchor id='Pg008'/> +by self-interest. <q>Most men,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi>, <q>are swayed in +their judgments by either love or hatred, likes or dislikes</q> (De Oratore, +II, 42). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +If this is the nature of human science, its adepts would be +badly deceiving themselves, if, in the pride of learning, they +would reject every correction, even proudly pushing aside the +hand of God that reaches down into the darkness of man's intellectual +life to offer its guidance. He who realizes that he is in +danger of losing his way in the dark, will not reject a reliable +guide; and he who fears to stumble will not refuse a helping +hand. Self-knowledge is the sister of wisdom, and the mother +of modesty. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Freedom.</head> + +<p> +Such, then, is science: not the goddess that emanated from +the head of immortal Jove, but the offspring of the puny mind +of man, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. And this science +cries for freedom. It would be free and act freely; it urges its +claim in the name of truth, which must not be slighted; in +the name of the progress of civilization, which must not be +hindered. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Freedom</emph> clearly means nothing less than to be untrammeled +and free from restraint, from fetter and check, in action, +thought, and desire. The prisoner is free when his chains drop +off, a people is free when it has cast off the yoke of serfdom, the +eagle is free and can spread out its wings in lofty flight when not +bound down to the earth. Science, therefore, should be free in +its activity from bond, fetter, and restraint. Does this mean +it must be free from <emph>all</emph> restraint and law? Should the historian +be given the right to make <hi rend='italic'>Solon</hi> a member of the French +Academy, or of the heroes of Troy mediæval knights? Should +the scientist be given the right to break every rule of logic, to +ignore all progress, and perhaps in his capriciousness return to +the four elements of <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, or the astronomical chart of primitive +ages? Nobody demands this. No, science must be bound +by the <emph>truth</emph>. Freedom indeed should not mean lawlessness. +Science remains bound by the general laws of logic, and by +positive facts. Truth is the irremovable barrier set in restraint +<pb n='009'/><anchor id='Pg009'/> +of the freedom of everything, even of scientific thought. +The freedom of science therefore can only be freedom from +<emph>unreasonable</emph> restraint and fetters; from such that hinder +it unreasonably in its inquiry after the truth, and in the communication +of the results of its investigation. <emph>It should be +free, not from the internal bondage of truth, but from +the restraint by external authority</emph>, the restraint which +would hinder it, in an <emph>improper way</emph>, from approaching those +questions, and using those methods, that lead to the discovery +of truth, and from acknowledging the results it has found to +be true; or which would unlawfully keep it from making +known, for the benefit of others, the results of its investigation. +It should be free from any unjust restriction, imposed by state +or Church, by popular opinion, by party spirit, by hampering +protectorate, or servility of any kind. +</p> + +<p> +From any <emph>unjust</emph> restriction, we said. For this is clear: if +under certain circumstances there might be warrant for a <emph>just</emph> +restriction by external authority, such a restriction could not be +refused in the name of freedom. So long, then, as we understand +by freedom a <emph>lawful</emph> freedom, there cannot be included +in this the freedom from <emph>every</emph> external authority, but only +from <emph>unlawful</emph> interference. There is, then, the question +whether there may be a legitimate restraint, imposed by external +authority, which man must not evade, and what the nature of +such restraint may be. +</p> + +<p> +We must, moreover, take into consideration two elements, +which are distinguished in the above definitions, both belonging +to the modern idea of scientific freedom. We will call them +<emph>freedom of research</emph>, and <emph>freedom of teaching</emph>. The investigator +and the scientist claim the one; the teacher, the other. +Searching after truth, and communicating the truth found, are, +as is known, the principal occupations of science. The scientist +should first of all be an investigator. He should not be +content to appropriate to himself the knowledge of others, he +should also make his own additions to knowledge. He is also +commonly a teacher, by word of mouth, as at the university, +or by his writing, in his literary activity. Research, as such, +imparts directly a certain knowledge only to the investigator; +<pb n='010'/><anchor id='Pg010'/> +it is of a private nature and as such does not reach beyond +him. But by teaching, his ideas are communicated to others, +and then begin to influence their thought, will, and action, often +very strongly. Teaching is a social factor; with it are bound +up the weal and woe of others. Suppose a man of influence +conceives in his study the idea that monogamy is an infringement +upon the universal rights of man; should he be +given without any ado the right of disseminating, by teaching, +the imagined results of his investigation, to the confusion of +men, and with serious danger to the peace of society? +</p> + +<p> +We shall therefore have to distinguish between freedom of research +and freedom of teaching. The neglect of this distinction +causes not a little confusion; thus, if one complains of +his convictions being trammeled or his liberty of conscience +being violated, when he is hindered from immediately proclaiming +whatever he calls his convictions. Private opinion, and the +public propaganda of this opinion, are evidently very different +things. It may be that an opinion seems to me the right one, +but, in spite of that, public dissemination of it may, always +or under certain circumstances, mean danger to my fellow-men. +If I am for this reason prevented from publishing it, I am +not thereby hindered from giving it my own private assent. It +is, moreover, quite clear that the state—we disregard here religious +authority—cannot at all directly restrict research, which +is something personal. It can only impose restrictions on the +communication of one's ideas by teaching them to others, which +is a social function. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +From these few remarks will be followed the impropriety of the +following, or similar, observations: <q>The fostering of science and its +teaching are not separate functions ... to insinuate a twofold function +of freedom, viz., that of the savant and that of the teacher, would be to +dissolve the unity of the moral personality</q> (<hi rend='italic'>W. Kahl</hi>, Bekenntnissgebundenheit +und Lehrfreiheit (1897), 22). It is not at all double-dealing +if some one does not publicly proclaim one's private knowledge. Is it +double-dealing, is it a violation of <q>the unity of the moral personality,</q> +if one is, and must be, silent about official secrets? And if one does not +tell, and is not allowed to tell, official secrets, if one prevents an anarchist +from spreading his revolutionary ideas, is this a violation of the +unity of the moral personality? It is true that <q>to deny one's convictions +is a violation of one of the most indubitable principles of moral +<pb n='011'/><anchor id='Pg011'/> +conduct</q> (<hi rend='italic'>K. v. Amira</hi>, Die Stellung des akademischen Lehrers zur +Freiheit in Forschung und Lehre. Beilage der Muenchener Neuesten +Nachrichten. 9. Juli, 1908). But it is logically incorrect to conclude +therefrom that the freedom of teaching should not be restricted. To +keep silence is not denying one's convictions. Later on, when speaking +of freedom in teaching, we shall return to this thought and deal with +it more thoroughly. +</quote> + +<p> +So far there can be no serious diversity of opinion. Freedom +from unjust restraint is demanded, and rightly demanded, for +science. The very object of science requires it. In scientific +research man's power of discernment should freely develop; +his inclination towards truth should exert itself; and by communication +of acquired knowledge mankind should advance in +mental and material culture. +</p> + +<p> +The bud bursts forth and freely unfolds its splendour; the +butterfly grows unhindered in beauty; the tree, too, wants freedom, +in order to develop its boughs and branches according to +its nature, and if you try to bind and tie it, it resists as much +as it can. Just so is freedom needful for the development +of the noblest aspirations of human nature, for its progress +in knowledge. Every friend of humanity, every one who loves +his own kind, must be in sympathy with its progress. Who +will not rejoice to see the mind of man happily trace the +laws of nature, laid down by the Spirit of God in the stillness +of eternity when as yet there was no creature to heed, the laws +He then placed in nature in order that the reasonable creature +might discern the marks of his Creator? Who would not rejoice +to see man, diligently following the facts of history and studying +the works of literature and art, find therein the ideas of +God reflected, as the rays of the sun in the trembling drop of +dew, and, finally, trying to solve the difficult problems of life? +To this end has the Creator enkindled in the mind of man a +spark of His own intelligence; to this end has He put in him a +desire to inquire and learn, a desire which has exerted itself +most in the noblest of men. Man is destined to find his ultimate +gratification in beholding the Eternal Truth and Beauty, a +vision which will be the completion of human science and culture, +the highest perfection of created life. Thus man's noble +desire for knowledge and truth must develop, it must be able to +<pb n='012'/><anchor id='Pg012'/> +produce leaves and blossoms. For this he needs freedom, free +air, and free light. +</p> + +<p> +If science is to attain its high purpose, it must have freedom +also to impart the knowledge acquired. It should indeed further +the progress of mankind. By its discovery it should enhance +the beauty of human life, should enrich the treasure of human +knowledge, should promote education and morality, to the honour +of the Creator. For this end, too, freedom is necessary: freedom +to impart newly acquired knowledge, else there would be +no pleasure in work, stagnation rather than progress. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='013'/><anchor id='Pg013'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter II. Two Views Of The World And Their Freedom.</head> + +<p> +There can, then, be no difference of opinion on this matter +among sober-minded men: science must be free from all +unjust hindrances and restraint. But we have not yet finished. +We have not even proceeded very far on our way. The further +question at once presents itself: Which are those unjust hindrances +and restraints that scientific research and teaching may +reject? May there not perhaps be such which it must respect? +There is little meaning in the cry: Freedom! Freedom! This +attractive word, which always finds an enthusiastic echo in man, +may easily prove a misleading catchword, and become a dangerous +weapon of the thoughtless and the unscrupulous. +</p> + +<p> +The question is not, whether our science, or, to speak more +generally, our intellectual life, must be free—of that there can +be no doubt. No life can spring up and thrive without due freedom. +The question is: <emph>What sort of freedom?</emph> how can it +be more precisely defined? We all, indeed, demand freedom +for the citizen; but what kind of freedom? He should be +free from the fetters of tyranny and despotism. Do we also +demand that he be free from the laws of the state? By no +means! On the contrary, he must be subject to these, for +the very reason that he is a citizen and not the inhabitant of an +uncivilized world. We demand freedom for the artist; he +should not be bound by the tyranny of fashion. Do we also demand +that he be exempt from the laws of beauty and art? Not +at all. He must subject himself to these if he means to be an +artist and not a quack. That would not be true freedom, but +lawlessness and license, the privilege of barbarism. Freedom +therefore is a very ambiguous word. +</p> + +<p> +There are <emph>two kinds of freedom</emph>, <emph>lawful</emph> and <emph>unlawful</emph>: +the latter is freedom from just laws, the former from unjust +laws. +</p> + +<pb n='014'/><anchor id='Pg014'/> + +<p> +We ask again, what is that lawful freedom which man +may claim for his scientific activity? In other words, what +are the restraints which he may reject as unjust, and as enslaving +the mind?—Here the ways part. Here, too, our question goes +deeper, and touches something which moves men's minds very +powerfully. Two different views of the world, two opposite +conceptions of man and his thought, come here in collision. +</p> + +<div> +<head>The Christian View of the World and its Freedom.</head> + +<p> +On the one hand there is the Christian view of the world: +it is essentially also the one which appears self-evident to every +unbiassed mind. In this view man is a <emph>creature, limited in +every way, therefore in many ways dependent upon</emph> +external rules, forces, and authorities. To God alone is it reserved +to be infinite, and, therefore, to possess in Himself all perfection, +goodness, and truth; for which reason there is nothing +above Him on which He could be dependent. This is not the case +with man. As a creature man is subject to his Creator. The latter +is master over man's life and therefore at the same time its +ultimate aim. For this reason religion is of obligation to man, +that is, he must honour God as He demands it; if God requires +faith in a revelation, if He established a Church and duly authorized +it to guide us, we must submit to it. In the same +way the intellect of man is bound by the laws of objective truth, +which is not of his making, but presents itself to him as a norm: +he must always be subject to it whether he wishes or not. Man +is, finally, a factor in social life; he lives in the family, state, +and Church, in the great society of mankind; upon them he is +dependent for his education and development. And society requires +that man be subject to a ruling authority, that in many +things his own interests be subordinated to the welfare of the +community. +</p> + +<p> +This is the order that God has established and wishes observed. +Hence all human authority is a participation in God's supreme +government. Thus it comes about that limits may be set to the +scientist's free expression of his views, if the interest of the community +require it. +</p> + +<pb n='015'/><anchor id='Pg015'/> + +<p> +Man is, nevertheless, free. But his freedom does not mean +complete independence; nor freedom from all restraint, but +only from those external restraints which are opposed to his +nature and position, which hinder his legitimate development and +activity. He possesses freedom, but only such a freedom as is +his due, by which he can unfold and develop his physical and +mental powers. To keep his place of subordination to, and dependence +on, these higher authorities and powers of truth and +order, tends not to injure but to improve his being, not to dwarf +but to develop his personality; for they are sources of life to +him, they impart to his existence order and harmony, they raise +him above himself and his own littleness, they free him from +the prison of his own narrowness and selfishness, from the +chains of his unruly desires. If a man emancipates himself +from these bonds, which he ought to bear, he has freedom +of course, but an unnatural freedom, which will be harmful and +perhaps ruinous to him. +</p> + +<p> +Take the tree, for instance. It should have freedom for its +natural growth. If you force it to creep along the ground +instead of growing upward, if you deny it air and light, you +infringe on the freedom it should have. Still it cannot have absolute +freedom, for it is dependent on the ground from which it derives +its nourishment, dependent on the laws of light and atmosphere +and gravitation, on the laws of season; it must adapt +itself to climate and soil. It may not say to the light: Away +with you!—a stunted growth and deformity would be the +result of such emancipation. It may not say to the ground: +Away with you!—a sad but quick death would be its fate. It +has its freedom, and in this freedom it grows and thrives. If +it desires greater freedom, it would be an unnatural one, and it +would tend, not to its development, but to its destruction. +</p> + +<p> +Such is the Christian view of man and his thought. Here, +then, there is but one question to solve: Are the external restraints +imposed on me in my investigation and teaching +against my nature; against the right of my mind to truth; +against my position in human society? If so, then I reject +them, because they mean serfdom, not duty; unjust bonds, +not natural restraint. But if not, then I do not refuse them +<pb n='016'/><anchor id='Pg016'/> +my submission. Freedom I want, but only the freedom of +man. +</p> + +<p> +Here we pause. Suffice it at present to have formulated the +question; we shall return to this topic later and discuss it at +greater length. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Modern Idea of Freedom.</head> + +<p> +The Christian view of man and his freedom, which to past +ages appeared self-evident, has grown obscure to many minds, +and given place to another, a more modern view.<note place='foot'>Whenever we use here the word <q>modern,</q> we do not take it in +the sense of <q>present,</q>—the Christian view of the world is also a +present one, and is still of the utmost importance,—but in the sense +of <q>new</q> in contrast to the time-honoured and inherited.</note> +</p> + +<p> +For the modern man, freedom, especially freedom of intellectual +life, means <emph>independence from external ties, from +all authority</emph>, or, to express it positively, absolute right of self-determination, +<emph>autonomy</emph>. He does not recognize any law or +rule which he has not imposed upon himself. In civil life, of +course, it is a principle that man must submit to external, legal +restraint in many things that do not directly concern his own +person, but only so far as is necessary in order that others, +too, may enjoy the same freedom; but also here every citizen +must be able to share in the legislation, according to the rules +of constitutional or republican government. But he must be +free from every external restraint in whatever touches the core +of his personality, his feeling, desire, thought, and the expression +of his thought. +</p> + +<p> +It should now be clear, from what has been said, what is +meant by <emph>freedom of science</emph>. It means independence from +every external authority and restraint in research and teaching, +the unhindered development and assertion of one's own intellectual +personality. Man must let himself be directed only by his +own judgment and his instinct for the truth, or his personal +need, without heeding dogmas, Church laws, tradition, or any +other external norm whatsoever. This is particularly true in the +<emph>domain of philosophy and religion</emph>, in questions regarding +the world and life, and in fundamental social questions. +<pb n='017'/><anchor id='Pg017'/> +This is principally, and almost exclusively, the field in +which an authoritative influence of the Church, or state, or society +in general, is to be feared. Hence the importance of the +question of the freedom of science in this field. +</p> + +<p> +This is also the manner in which the advocates of modern +freedom of science unanimously describe it. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +For the academic teacher, says <hi rend='italic'>G. Kaufmann</hi>, there are <q>strictly +speaking only the barriers drawn by his own instinct for the truth. +It is in this sense that we demand freedom of science to-day for +the university teacher. The freedom of the scientist and of the academic +teacher must not be limited by patented truth, nor by faint-hearted +consideration</q> (Die Lehrfreiheit an den deutschen Universitaeten +im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (1898), 36). The first resolution +proposed at the <hi rend='italic'>Second Conference of German University Teachers</hi>, at +Jena, in September, 1908, was this: <q>The purpose of scientific research, +and the communication of its results, demand that it be independent of +every consideration foreign to scientific method itself.</q> Of this resolution +we have from another source the following explanation: <q>Therefore, +it should be independent especially of tradition and the prejudices +of the masses, independent of authority and social bodies, independent +of party interest.</q> (This was the addition to the thesis as originally +formulated by Prof. <hi rend='italic'>von Amira</hi>. Beilage der Muenchener Neuesten Nachrichten, +July 9, 1908.) And Prof. <hi rend='italic'>F. Paulsen</hi> writes: <q>No thought can +be commanded or forbidden the academic teacher or his audience</q> (Die +deutschen Universitaeten und das Universitaets-studium, 1902, 288). +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>A. Harnack</hi> likewise teaches that <q>In regard to research and knowledge +there must be unlimited freedom,</q> especially in matters of religion. +Here <q>man must fully understand his own innermost being; +the soul must recognize its own needs and the indicated way to their +satisfaction. This it can do only when it is entirely free.</q> <q>The fear +that thereby the door to serious error is thrown open should not in +the least deter it, for the most serious error of all is the opinion that +man should not enjoy perfect freedom in the determination of his state</q> +(Neue Freie Presse, 7 Juni, 1908). +</p> + +<p> +The same demands are made by free-thinkers, who are always and +everywhere in favor of free science. The <hi rend='italic'>International Congress of +Free-thinkers</hi>, held at Rome in June, 1904, thus defines free-thought: +<q>Since free-thought cannot concede to any authority whatever the +right to oppose human reason, or even to supersede it, it demands +that its advocates reject directly not only any compulsory belief, but +also every authority that tries to enforce its dogmas, even though +such an authority be based on revelation, or though it command obedience +to dogmas or a-priori principles of philosophy, or to the decisions +of public authority or the vote of a majority.</q>—We shall have frequent +occasion to speak of this freedom in these pages. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Hence it is easily seen that this view differs from the one +we considered before. Freedom from <emph>all</emph> external restraint +<pb n='018'/><anchor id='Pg018'/> +has superseded freedom from <emph>unjust</emph> restraint. The presumption +has found acceptance that every interference by +authority is unjust, a violation of the natural rights of man and +his thought. On what is this presumption based? In other +words: What are the philosophical premises of modern freedom +of science? We shall be occupied with this question now +for some time. For only after we have attentively considered +it, can we gain an intelligent idea of the nature of this freedom, +of its methods, and of the justice of its claims. Advocates +of this view not infrequently think they have exhausted +its meaning when they have protested against ecclesiastical encroachments, +when they have held forth against Syllabus and +Index. Of the deeper thoughts it contains they have scarcely +any idea. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Humanitarian View of the World.</head> + +<p> +We may distinguish a twofold basis for this view, a general +and a particular one. The latter, which is connected with the +former, is subjectivism in thought. The former, the more +<emph>general</emph>, at the same time the <emph>real basis of the modern +freedom of science</emph>, is that particular view of man and his +position in the world, which we may call the theory of humanitarianism. +We are familiar with this word—it has its history. +The word of itself conveys a good meaning: it means human +nature and dignity, thought and desire worthy of man, nobility +of culture. During the Renaissance the so-called <q>humanists</q> +identified culture with knowledge of the ancient classical +literature. Many of them, however, added to the admiration of +classical literature also preference for pagan tastes, to the contempt +of the Christian spirit. Since that time the word <emph>humanitarian</emph> +has never lost its unchristian sense; it has ever +been made the motto of men who emancipated themselves from +God and Christianity. Hence it is extensively the motto of our +times. +</p> + +<p> +It has changed the position of man. It has forgotten that +man is a created, limited, even a fallen being, withal destined +for eternal existence. To it man is everything; man left to himself +and to his life in this world, severed from God and his +<pb n='019'/><anchor id='Pg019'/> +eternal destiny, an <emph>absolute, purely worldly being</emph>. No +longer does he look up to Heaven, no longer does he get +from above his laws, his hope for help, and strength, and +eternal life. He is his own and only end: he and his earthly +happiness and advancement. In himself alone he sees the source +of his strength, in himself he finds his law, to himself alone is he +responsible, the inherited corruption of his nature he has +forgotten. What God once was to our fathers—the end and +rule of their life—that now is Man to their sons. The +anthropocentric has succeeded the theocentric view of the +world. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Diis extinctis successit humanitas</foreign> (Man has succeeded +the fallen gods). <q>Out of the corrupted nations and decaying +religions let there arise a more beautiful humanity!</q> is +the radical cry of this humanitarian religion. +</p> + +<p> +When in 1892 the battle for a new school law was raging +in Prussia, <hi rend='italic'>Caprivi</hi>, the Chancellor of the Empire, said: +<q>It is here question of a contrast between Christianity and +atheism. Essential to man is his relation to God.</q> Scarcely +had these words been uttered when a champion of modern +thought, Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Jodl</hi>, took up his pen and wrote: <q>No +sharper contrast with the convictions of the modern world is +imaginable than that expressed by the words of the imperial +Chancellor, <q>essential to man is his relation to God.</q> To +this sentence, which might be expected in a speech of Cromwell, +or in a papal encyclical, rather than from a statesman of modern +Germany, liberalism must with all possible emphasis oppose +this other sentence: What determines the real worth of a man, +is, first and last, his relation to humanity</q> (Moral, Religion +und Schule, 1892, 14f.). <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Diis extinctis successit humanitas</foreign>. +We shall not deny that the modern spirit is a complicated structure: +but neither can any one deny that its chief characteristic +is the humanitarian view, with its emancipation from +God, its decided emphasis of the things of this world, and +its boundless overestimation of man. +</p> + +<p> +An attentive observer of these days, should he chance to come +from an old, Catholic town, and saunter with observant eye +through one of our great modern cities, particularly a Protestant +one, would behold a vivid realization of this modern view +<pb n='020'/><anchor id='Pg020'/> +of the world. The most prominent feature of the Catholic town +of old was the House of God. It towered high above the city, +its spires reached heavenward; the houses of the faithful clung +around the House of God like chicks about the mother hen. The +mere sight told the beholder that here dwelt a people whose +thoughts were directed towards the other world; over their +lives ruled the sacred peace of eternity. +</p> + +<p> +But here all is different. Here the most prominent feature +is no longer the House of God; worldly edifices have usurped its +place; railroad depots, barracks, city-hall and court-house dominate +the city. The state house bears no longer on its front the +Christian motto, <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Nisi Dominus custodierit</foreign> (<q>Unless the Lord +keep the city he watcheth in vain that keepeth it</q>). It would be +considered a degradation should the state base its existence upon +religion. Should, then, the observer enter the legislature he +would learn the modern principles of state wisdom. The state +as such has no relation to religion; the principle is the separation +of state and Church. In the public squares he beholds +mighty monuments, erected, not to religious heroes and leaders, +as perhaps of old, but to great men of the world, champions of +national progress. At their feet lie wreaths of homage. They +have brought modern humanity to its full stature, maturity, and +self-consciousness. Here it is Man who is standing everywhere +in the foreground. <q>It is I,</q> says he, <q>that lives here. Here +I have pitched my tent, from this earth come all my joys, and +this sun is shining upon my sorrows.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Our observer, wandering about, finds everywhere magnificent +state-schools, scientific institutes, splendid colleges and +universities. In years gone by a cross or a word of divine +wisdom was probably found here somewhere. It is seen no +more. Often it would seem that we can almost hear the +words: <q>We will not have this One rule over us.</q> Here a +new race is being reared, which no longer follows blindly +the <q>old tradition,</q> it believes in its own self and its own +reason: culture and science take the place of the old religion. +He finds but few churches; and where found they are +mostly overshadowed by great palaces, and—mostly empty. +The modern man passes them by. He has no longer any understanding +<pb n='021'/><anchor id='Pg021'/> +for the truths of the Christian religion. It fails to +satisfy him because it does not appeal to modern ways of thinking +and feeling, because it does not symbolize the humanitarian +creed. His desire is no longer for Heaven; his +aspirations are earthward. <q>The life beyond concerns me +little: my joys come from this world.</q> Contemplating modern +civilization he exclaims, with the king of Babylon: <q>Is not +this the great Babylon, which I have built to be the seat of +the kingdom, by the strength of my power, and in the glory of +my excellence?</q> (Dan. iv. 27). The doctrine of a nature corrupted +by original sin, of a darkened intellect that needs divine +revelation, of a weakened will that needs strength from above, of +sin that demands atonement,—all this has become meaningless +to him, it offends his higher sentiments, his human dignity. He +has no longer any understanding for a Saviour of the world, in +whom alone salvation is to be sought, much less for a Cross. +This sign of redemption, as a certain herald of modern thought +remarked, weighs like a mountain upon the mind of our day. +He has no longer any understanding for the saving institution of +the Church, by whom he should be led: she is to him an institution +of intellectual serfdom. He makes his own religion, free +from dogma, just as his individuality desires, just as he +<q>lives</q> it. +</p> + +<p> +Should our observer, while visiting the Protestant city, make +a final visit to its university, he will find there the thoughts, +which hitherto he had but vaguely felt, clothed in scientific +language. There they meet his gaze, defined sharply on +the pedestal of Research as the Modern Philosophy, protected, +often exclusively privileged, by the state license of teaching. +It is the modern scientific view of the world, the only one that +men of modern times may hold. From here it is to find its +way to wider circles. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Man,</q> we are told by a pupil of <hi rend='italic'>Feuerbach</hi>, in accord with +his master's teaching, <q>man is man's god. And only by the enthronement +of this human god can the super-human and ultra-human God +be made superfluous. What Christianity was and claimed to be in +times gone by, that now is claimed by humanity.</q> <q>The being which +man in religion and theology reveres,</q> continues <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi> with <hi rend='italic'>Feuerbach</hi>, +<q>is his own being, the essence of his own desires and ideals. If you +<pb n='022'/><anchor id='Pg022'/> +eliminate from this conception all that is mere fancy and contrary to the +laws of nature, what is left is a cultural ideal of civilization, a refined +humanity, which will become a reality by its own independent strength +and labour</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Ludwig Feuerbach</hi>, 1904, 111 f., 194). <q>The greatest +achievement of modern times,</q> says another panegyrist of emancipated +humanity, <q>is the deliverance from the traditional bondage of a direct +revelation.... Neither revelation nor redemption approach man from +without; he is bound rather to struggle for his perfection by his own +strength. What he knows about God, nature, and his own self, is of his +own doing. He is in reality <q>the measure of all things, of those that +are, and why they are; of those that are not, and why they are not.</q> +Of his dignity as an image of God, he has therefore not lost anything; +on the contrary, he has come nearer to his resemblance to God, +his highest end, by his consciousness of being self-existent and of +having the destiny to produce everything of himself; from a receptive +being he has become a spontaneous one; he has at last come to a +clear knowledge of his own real importance and destiny</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Spicker</hi>, Der +Kampf zweier Weltanschauungen, 1898, 134). +</p> + +<p> +Hence <q>not to make man religious,</q> to quote again the above-mentioned +exponent of modern wisdom of life, <q>but to educate, to promote +culture among all classes and professions, this is the task of the present +time.</q> <q>Religion cannot therefore be the watchword of a progressive +humanity; neither the religion of the past nor the religion that +is to be looked for in the future, but ethics</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>, ibid., 108, 112). +Ethics, to be sure, the fundamental principles of which are not the commandments +of God, by the keeping of which we are to reach our eternal +happiness, but human laws, which are observed for the sake of man. +<q>Morality and religion,</q> we are told, <q>shall no longer give us a +narrow ladder on which we, each one for himself, climb to the heights +of the other world; we are vaulting a majestic dome above this +earth under which the generations come and go, succeeding each +other in continuous procession.... The day will come when the +rays of thought which are now dawning upon the highest and freest +mountain-tops will bring the light of noonday down to mankind.</q> Woe +to us, if from these high mountain-tops, where the bare rocks no longer +take life and fecundity from the heavens, the sad desert of estrangement +from God should extend into the fresh green of the valleys! +</p> + +<p> +The central ideas of the humanitarian view of the world appear +again, though under different form, among Freemasons and free-thinkers, +agitators for free religion and free schools. It is well known +that Freemasonry has emblazoned <q>humanity</q> upon its standard. +<q>One word of the highest meaning,</q> so wrote an official authority some +years ago, <q>contains in itself the principle, the purpose, and the +whole tenor of Freemasonry, this word is humanity. Humanity is +indeed everything to us.</q> <q>What is humanity? It is all, and only +that, which is human</q> (Freiburger Ritual, 24. <hi rend='italic'>Pachtler</hi>, Der Goetze +der Humanitaet, 1875, 249 f.). <q>That which is essentially human +is the sublime, divine, and the only Christian ideal,</q> adds another +authority, addressing the aspirant to Freemasonry. <q>Leave behind +you in the world your different church-formulas when you enter our +temple, but let there always be with you the sense for what is holy in +<pb n='023'/><anchor id='Pg023'/> +man, the religion which alone makes us happy</q> (Latomia, 1868, p. 167, +<hi rend='italic'>Pachtler</hi>, 248). As early as 1823 the <q>Zeitschrift fuer Freimauerei</q> +wrote: <q>We should be accused of idolatry should we personify the idea +of humanity in the way in which the Divinity is usually personified. +This is indeed our reason for withholding from the eyes of profane persons +the humanitarian cult, till the time has come when, from east to +west, from noon to midnight, its high ideal will be pondered and its cult +propagated everywhere</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Pachtler</hi>, 255). +</p> + +<p> +The time has already come when <q>the rays of thought that +dawned upon the mountain-tops</q> are descending into the valley. +The Twenty-second Convention of German Free-religionists, at Goerlitz, +at the end of May, 1907, passed this resolution: <q>The Convention +sees one of its chief tasks in the alliance of all anti-clericals +and free-thinkers, and tries by united effort to obtain this common +end and interest by promoting culture, liberty of mind, and humanitarianism.</q> +There was, moreover, taken up for discussion the thesis: +<q>Free-religionists reject the teaching that declares man lost by original +sin, unable to raise himself of his own strength and reason, that +directs him to revelation, redemption, and grace from above.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +This view of the world finds its most characteristic expression +in <emph>pantheism</emph>, which, though expressed in various and often +fantastic forms, is eminently the religion of modern man. +From this gloomy depth of autotheism the apotheosis of man +and his earthly life, the modern consciousness of freedom, draws +its strength and determination. +</p> + +<p> +To find this modern view of man expressed in the language +of consistent radicalism, let us hear <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Nietzsche</hi>, the most +modern of all philosophers. His ideal is the transcendental +man, who knows that God is dead, that now there is no bar +to stepping forth in unrestricted freedom to superhuman greatness +and independence. To this <q>masterman,</q> who deems +himself superior to others, everything is licit that serves his +egotism and will, everything that will promote his interest +to the disadvantage of the rabble; probity is cowardice! +<q>But now this god is dead. Ye superior men, this god +was your greatest danger.</q> Thus spoke Zarathustra. <q>Only +since this god is buried do you begin to rise. Now at length +the great Noon is in its zenith. Now the superior man becomes +master. Onward and upward, then, ye superior men! +At last the mountain of man's future is in travail. God is dead; +let the superior man arise and live.</q> (Also sprach Zarathustra, +W. W. VI, 418.) And, in the consciousness that the Christian +<pb n='024'/><anchor id='Pg024'/> +religion condemns this self-exaltation, he breaks out in this +blasphemous charge: <q>I call Christianity the one great curse, the +one great internal corruption.... I call it the one immortal, +disgraceful, blot on mankind</q> (Antichrist, W. W. VIII, 313). +This is independent humanity in the cloak of fanaticism. +<hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> has carried the modern view of the world to its final +consequences; the autonomous man has developed into the god-like +superman who carries into effect the behest: Ye shall be +as gods; his code of ethics is that of the autocrat who is above +the notions of good and bad. +</p> + +<p> +And <q>let no one deceive himself,</q> writes an intelligent observer +of the times, <q>the spirit of our time is attuned to +<hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche's</hi> idea.</q> Consciously or unconsciously this sentiment +dominates more minds than many a man learned in the wisdom +of the schools may dream of. Did <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> create this spirit? +Certainly not: he grew out of it, he has only given it a philosophical +setting. <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> would never have caused that tremendous +sensation, never have gathered around him his enthusiastic +followers, had not the soil been prepared. As it was, he appeared +to <q>his</q> men as the Messiah <q>in the fulness of time.</q> +He, too, in his own way <q>loosened the tongue of the dumb +and opened the eyes of the blind.</q> The veiled anti-Christian +spirit, the unconscious religious and ethical nihilism, which +no one before dared profess openly, though it was hatching in +the minds, now had found its <q>master,</q> its <q>scientific system</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Von Grotthuss</hi>, Tuermer, VII, 1905, 79). It is, asserts +<hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi>, <q>the new ideal of free personality, dependent on precarious +moods and chance influences, that has found in +<hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche's</hi> philosophy a fantastic expression</q> (Ethik, ed. 3. +1905, p. 522). +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Autonomous Man.</head> + +<p> +Now we have a clearer idea of modern freedom. It is known +as autonomism. The individual wants to be a law to himself, his +own court of last appeal; he wants to develop his personality, +feeling, desires, and thought, independently of all authority. +Too long, it is said, have man's aspirations been directed upward, +away from things, of this world, to a supernatural world. +<pb n='025'/><anchor id='Pg025'/> +Religion and Church seek to determine his thought and desire, +to subject him to dogma. Too long has he clung like a child to +the apron-strings of authority. Man has at last awoken to self-consciousness +and to a sense of his own dignity, after a period of +estrangement, so to say, from himself; he has become himself +again, as the poet sang when the century of the <q>illuminati</q> was +closing: +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l><q rend='pre'>How beautiful, with palm of victory,</q></l> +<l>O man, thou standest at the century's close,</l> +<l>The mightiest son thy Time has given birth,</l> +<l>By reason free, by law and precept strong,</l> +<l>Alike in meekness great and treasure rich,</l> +<l><q rend='post'>So long unknown concealed within thy breast.</q></l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +Yes, man has discovered the treasure that long lay hidden in +his breast, the seed and bud that longed to burst forth into life +and blossom. Now the motto is: Independent self-development; +no more restraint, but living out one's personality. The eagle +is not given wings to be bound down upon the earth; nor does +the bud come forth never to unfold. Full freedom, therefore, +too, for everything human! And modern man leaps to the fatal +conclusion: therefore all interference of external authority is +unjust, is force, constraint upon my being; the same error +that boys fall into when life begins to tingle with its fulness +of strength. Being ignorant of their nature, they feel any kind +of dependence a chain; only themselves, their judgments and +desires, are law. Just so modern man, in his deplorable want +of self-knowledge, fails to see how he is cutting himself off from +the source and support of life; how he is pulling himself out +by the roots from the soil whence he derives his strength; how, +left to his own littleness, he withers away; how, abandoned to +his own diseased nature, he condemns himself to intellectual +decay. +</p> + +<p> +Autonomism, individualism, independent personality—these +have become the ideals that permeate the man of this age, and +influence the thought of thousands without their knowing it. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The well-known, Protestant, theologian, <hi rend='italic'>A. Sabatier</hi>, writes: <q>It is +not difficult to find the common principle to which all the expressions +and tendencies of the spirit of modern times can be reduced in any field +<pb n='026'/><anchor id='Pg026'/> +whatever. One word expresses it—the word, <q>autonomy.</q> By autonomy +I understand the firm confidence, which the mind of man has attained +in his present stage of development, that he contains in himself +his own rule of life and norm of thought, and that he harbours +the ardent desire of realizing himself by obeying his own law</q> (La +Religion de la Culture moderne, 10). +</p> + +<p> +<q>Modern times,</q> writes <hi rend='italic'>R. Eucken</hi>, <q>have changed the position of +the human subject ... it has become to them the centre of his life +and the ultimate end of his endeavours</q> (Zeitschrift fuer Philosophie +und philosophische Kritik, 112 (1898), 165 s.). Still clearer +are the following words of <hi rend='italic'>G. Spicker</hi>: <q>Man depended formerly +either on nature or on revelation, or on both at once; now it is just +the opposite: man is in every way, theoretically as well as practically, +an autonomist. If anything can denote clearly the characteristic difference +between the modern and the old scholastic view, it is this +absolute, subjective, standpoint.</q> <q>As we in principle do not intend +to depend on any objectivity or authority, there is nothing left but +the autonomy of the subject</q> (Der Kampf zweier Weltanschauungen +(1898), 143, 145). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +A noted apostle of modern freedom exclaims enthusiastically: +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>This after all is freedom: an unconditional appreciation of human +greatness, no matter how it asserts itself. This greatest happiness, as +<hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi> called it, the humanists have restored to us. Henceforth we +must with all our strength retain it. Whoever wants to rob us of +it, even should he descend from heaven, is our deadliest enemy.</q> (<hi rend='italic'>H. +St. Chamberlain.</hi>) +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is true, of course, that man should strive for perfection +of self in every respect; for the harmonious development of +all the faculties and good inclinations of his own being, and, in +this sense, for a nobler humanity; he should also develop and +assert his own peculiar disposition and originality, so far as +they are in order, and thus promote a healthy individualism. +But all this he should do within the moral bonds of his created +and limited nature, being convinced that only by keeping within +the right limits of his being can he develop his ability and +personality harmoniously; he dare not reach out, in reckless venture +after independence, to free himself from God and his eternal +end, and from the yoke of truth; he dare not transform the +divine sovereignty into the distorted image of created autotheism. +</p> + +<p> +He who professes a Christian view of the world, can see +in such a view of man and his freedom only an utter misunderstanding +of human nature and an overthrow of the right +<pb n='027'/><anchor id='Pg027'/> +order of things. This overthrow, again, can only produce calamity, +interior and exterior disorder. Woe to the planet that +feels its orbit a tyrannical restraint, and leaves it to move in sovereign +freedom through the universe! It will move along free, +and free will it go to ruin. Woe to the speeding train that +leaves its track; it will speed on free, but invariably dash +itself to pieces! A nature that abandons the prescribed safeguards +can only degenerate into a wild sprout. We shall see +how these principles have actually become in modern intellectual +life the principles of negation and intellectual degeneration. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> states the history of mankind in the following, +thoughtful words: <q>A twofold love divides mankind +into the City of the World and the City of God. Man's self-love +and his self-exaltation pushed to the contempt of God constitute +the City of the World; but the love of God pushed to contempt +of self is the foundation of the City of God.</q> (<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Fecerunt +itaque civitates duas amores duo, terrenam scilicet amor sui +usque ad contemptum Dei, coelestem vero amor Dei usque ad +contemptum sui.</foreign> De civ. Dei XIV, 28.) Thus <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>, +while contemplating the time when the war between +heathenism and Christianity was raging. The same spectacle +is presented to our own eyes to-day, probably more thoroughly +than ever before in history. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Period of Man's Emancipation.</head> + +<p> +The modern view of man and his freedom has shaped itself +gradually in recent times; the present is ever the child of the +past. The most important factor in this development was undoubtedly +the <emph>Reformation</emph>. It emancipated man in the +most important affair, religious life, from the authority of the +Church, and made him independent. <q>All have the right to +try and to judge what is right and wrong in belief,</q> so <hi rend='italic'>Luther</hi> +told the Christian nobility of the German nation; <q>everybody +shall according to his believing mind interpret the Scriptures, +it is the duty of every believing Christian to espouse the faith, +to understand and defend it, and to condemn all errors.</q> +Protestantism means even to the modern man <q>the thinking +<pb n='028'/><anchor id='Pg028'/> +mind's break with authority, a protest against being fettered +by anything positive, the mind's return to itself from self-alienation</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Schwegler</hi>, Geschichte der Philosophie (1887), +167): <q>it puts out of joint the Christian Church organization, +and overturns its supernatural foundation, quite against its will, +but with an actual, and ever more plainly visible, effect</q> (<hi rend='italic'>E. +Troeltsch</hi>, Die Bedeutung des Protestantismus fuer die +Entstehung der modernen Welt (1906), 29). +</p> + +<p> +The first step towards full autonomy was taken with energy; +the emancipation from external authority then progressed rapidly +in the domain of politics, sociology, economy, and especially +of religion, to the very elimination of everything supernatural. +There came the English individualism of the seventeenth century. +The liberty of <q>individual conviction,</q> termed also +<q>tolerance,</q> in the sense of rejecting every authoritative interference +in the sanctuary of man's thought and feeling, was +extolled; of course at first only as the privilege of those who +were intellectually superior. Soon the Deism of a <hi rend='italic'>Herbert of +Cherbury</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Locke</hi> was reached; it was the religion of +natural reason, with belief in God and the obligation to moral +action. Whatever is added by positive religions, and therefore +by the Christian religion, is superfluous; hence not dogma, but +freedom! <hi rend='italic'>Locke</hi>, indeed, denied to atheists state toleration; but +<hi rend='italic'>J. Toland</hi> already advised full freedom of thought, even to the +tolerance of atheism. In the year 1717 <emph>Freemasonry</emph> came into +existence in England. <hi rend='italic'>Adam Smith</hi> originated the idea of a +liberal political economy which frees the individual from all +bond, even in the economic field. The views prevailing in +England then exert great influence in France. <hi rend='italic'>Rousseau</hi> and +<hi rend='italic'>Voltaire</hi> appear. +</p> + +<p> +In France and Germany the enlightenment of the eighteenth +century makes rapid strides in the direction of emancipation. +<q>The enlightenment of the eighteenth century,</q> writes <hi rend='italic'>H. +Heltner</hi>, <q>not only resumes the prematurely interrupted work +of the sixteenth century, the Reformation, but carries it on independently, +and in its own way. The thoughts and demands of the +<q>enlightened</q> are bolder and more aggressive, more unscrupulous +and daring.... With <hi rend='italic'>Luther</hi> the idea of revelation remained +<pb n='029'/><anchor id='Pg029'/> +intact; the new method of thought rejects the idea of a divine +revelation, and bases all religious knowledge on merely human +thought and sentiment.... It is only the free, entirely independent +thought that decides in truth and justice, moral +and political rights and duties. Reason has regained its self-glory; +man comes to his senses again</q> (Literaturgeschichte +des 18. Jahrhunderts II (1894), 553). <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> gave it a philosophical +setting. +</p> + +<p> +Then the <emph>French Revolution</emph> breaks into fierce blaze, writing +on the skies of Europe with flaming letters the ideas of emancipated +humanity; the adherents to the old religion are sent +to the guillotine. On August 27, 1789, the proclamation of the +<q>rights of man</q> is made. <q>The principles of 1789,</q> as they +are now called, henceforth dominate the nineteenth century. +The system which adopted these principles called itself, and still +calls itself, <emph>Liberalism</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Liberalism as a principle—we are speaking of the principles +of liberalism, not of its adherents, who for the most part +do not carry out these principles in their consequences, and +occasionally do not even grasp them completely—tried to accomplish +man's utter emancipation from all external and superior +authority. It sought to accomplish this in the political field, +by instituting constitutional, and, wherever possible, a republican +form of government; in the field of economy, by granting freedom +to labour and possession, to capital and commerce; but +especially in the field of morals and religion, by emancipating +thought and science, and the entire life of man,—school, marriage, +state,—from every religious influence and direction, and +in this sense it aimed at humanizing the whole life of man. This +is its purpose. To achieve this, it aims at establishing itself +in the state, by gaining political power through the aid of +compulsory laws, of course against all principles of freedom; +it tries to attain this by compulsory state-education, by obligatory +civil marriage, and so on. At first there appeared +only a moderate liberalism, which gradually gave place to a +more radical tendency, striving more directly and openly +toward the enfeeblement and, if possible, the destruction of +the Christian view of the world and its chief representative, +<pb n='030'/><anchor id='Pg030'/> +the Church. In 1848 the well-known materialist <hi rend='italic'>K. Vogt</hi> said +at the national assembly in Frankfort: <q>Every church is +opposed to a free development of mankind, in that it demands +faith above all. Every church is an obstacle in the way of man's +free intellectual development, and since I am for such intellectual +development of man, I am against every church</q> (cf. +<hi rend='italic'>Rothenbuecher</hi>, Trennung von Staat und Kirche (1908), 106). +</p> + +<p> +In the field of economics, every one can see how liberalism +has failed. In some countries people were ashamed to retain +its name any longer. It suddenly disappeared from public life, +and gave place to its translation,—free thought. This shows +that nobody cares to boast of its success. All barriers of safety +had been removed in a night; crises, confusion, and the serious +danger of the social question were the consequence. In the field +of actual economics it became clear that the principle of unlimited +freedom could not be carried out, because it was utterly ruinous, +and it really means a complete misunderstanding of human +nature. Therefore liberalism has disappeared from this field, +leaving to others to solve the problem it created, and to heal +the wounds it inflicted. It is otherwise in the field of theoretical +economics. Here it still strives to dominate, often more thoroughly +than before, no matter what name it may assume. The +consequences do not appear so gross to the eyes as they would +in the tangible sphere of sociology. Especially science it wants +to hold in subjection to its principles of freedom in undiminished +severity. +</p> + +<p> +That freedom which is identified with absolute independence +from all authority, especially in the intellectual sphere, +we shall here know as Liberal freedom, in contradistinction +to Christian freedom, which is satisfied with independence from +unjust restraint. +</p> + +<p> +In the foregoing discussion it has been shown how deeply the +liberal idea of freedom is imbedded in the unchristian philosophical +view of the world. The inevitable result is a freedom +of science which considers every authoritative interference in +research and teaching as an encroachment upon the rights of +free development in man's personality, especially in the sphere +of philosophy and religion. Moreover, the humanitarian view +<pb n='031'/><anchor id='Pg031'/> +of the world, insisting on the independence of man and his +earthly life, naturally demands the exclusion of God and the +other world, it orders the rejection of <q>dualism</q> as unscientific, +and the adoption of the monistic view in its stead; an autonomous +science can hardly be reconciled with a superior, restricting +authority. Later on we shall demonstrate that the main +law of modern science is that the supernatural is inadmissible. +Furthermore, since science is not a superhuman being, +but has its seat in the intellect of man, subject to the psychology +of man, every one who knows the heart of man will suspect +from the outset that man cannot stop at merely ignoring, but +will often proceed to combat and explain away faith, the Church, +and all authority that might be considered an oppressor of +the truth. This undue love of liberty will of itself become +a struggle for freedom against the oppressor. How far this +is actually the case we shall have occasion to discuss later on. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +We have heard <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche's</hi> haughty and proud boast. Shortly +after the philosopher had penned these words he was stricken +(1889) with permanent, incurable insanity, with which he +was afflicted till his death in 1900. The <q>transcendental +man</q> was dethroned. The strength of the Titan was shattered. +He that said with <hi rend='italic'>Prometheus</hi>, I am not a god, still I am in +strength the equal of any of them, received the ironical answer, +<q>Behold he has become as one of us</q> (Gen. iii. 22). He +that cursed Christian charity towards the poor and suffering, +was now cast helpless upon charity. His grave at Roecken, the +place also of his birth, is a sign of warning to the modern world. +</p> + +<p> +To the believing Christian a different grave opens on Easter +day. From it comes the risen God-man; in His hand the +banner of immortal victory. It points the way to true human +greatness, to a superior humanity according to the will +of God. Man longs for perfection; he longs to go beyond +the narrow limits of his present condition. But modern +man wants to rise to greatness by his own strength, without +help from above; he would rise with giant bounds, without +law. In his weakness he falls; error and scepticism and +the loss of morality are the bitter fruit. Another way is pointed +<pb n='032'/><anchor id='Pg032'/> +out by the great Friend of Man. Humanity is to be led on the +way of progress by the hand of God, by faith in God, supported +by His grace; thus man shall participate in God's nature, shall +one day attain his highest perfection in eternal life, far beyond +the limits of his present condition. <q>I am the way, the truth, +and the life.</q> +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='033'/><anchor id='Pg033'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter III. Subjectivism And Its Freedom.</head> + +<p> +The tendency of the modern intellect to independence in its +own peculiar sphere of thinking and knowing, cannot fail +to work itself out energetically. In this sphere it leads naturally +to that view of human reasoning called subjectivism: the thinking +or reasoning subject is its own law, the autonomous creator +and guide of its thought. Herein lies the <emph>essential presumption</emph>, +the very core, of the liberal freedom of science. Wherever +we turn we meet subjectivism with its autonomous rejection of all +authority, its arbitrary separation of knowledge from faith, its +agnosticism, its relativity to truth as the moving factor of, and +the ostensible warrant for, this freedom, especially in the +sphere which it considers peculiarly its own, philosophy and religion. +Only when we look closer into its philosophical premises +will it be possible to form a judgment of the <q>scientific +method</q> it employs in this, its peculiar sphere, and of the justice +of its claim to be the sole administrator of man's ideal possessions, +and to be altogether <q>independent of every view not +conforming to this scientific method.</q> Before considering subjectivism +let us by way of preface set down a few considerations +on the nature of human, intellectual perception. +</p> + +<div> +<head>Objectivism and Subjectivism.</head> + +<p> +It always has been, and still is, the firm conviction of unbiassed +men,—a conviction which irresistibly forces itself upon us,—that +in our intellectual perception and thought we grasp an +<emph>objective, exterior order of things, an existence distinct +from our thought</emph>; of this objective reality we reproduce +an image in our minds, and thus grasp it intellectually. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Cognitio +est similitudo rei</foreign>, says the old school; that is, Knowledge is +<pb n='034'/><anchor id='Pg034'/> +the reproduction of an objective reality, which thus becomes the +criterion of cognition. The reproduction is a counterpart of +the original. In this perfect resemblance of our cognition to +the objective reality there has ever been recognized the <emph>truth</emph> +of knowledge. +</p> + +<p> +When the thinking mind has arrived at the mathematical +truth that the circumference of a circle is the product of the diameter +multiplied by <hi rend='italic'>Ludolph's</hi> number, it knows—unless +indeed it has lost its natural candour—that it has not of itself +produced this result of reasoning, but that it has recognized +in it an objective reality of truth, distinct from its own +thought, and has reproduced that truth in itself. And because +this reproduction corresponds to the reality, it is called true cognition. +Similarly, when the intellect expresses the general law +of causality, namely, everything that happens has a cause, the +intellect is again convinced that it has not of itself produced +this result of reasoning, but has only reproduced it by assimilating +to itself an objective truth which is necessarily so and +cannot be otherwise, and which the mind must assimilate if it +wants to think aright. This is true not only when the mind is +dealing with concrete things, but also when it would give expression +to general principles, as in the present instance; these, too, +are not subjective projections, but are independent of the thinking +subject, and are eternal laws. +</p> + +<p> +This view of the nature of human cognition and thought has +gradually undergone an essential change, not indeed with those +outside the influence of philosophical speculation, but with the +representatives of modern philosophy, and those subject to its +influence. Objectivism has been superseded by subjectivism. Its +principle is this: cognition, imagination, and thought are not +the intellectual apprehension of an objective world existing independent +of us, of which we reproduce in ourselves a counterpart. +No, <emph>the mind creates its own results of reason and cognition</emph>; +the objects before us are the creatures of the imagining +subject. At the utmost, we can but say that our reasoning +is the manner in which a hidden exterior world appears to us. +This manner must necessarily conform to the peculiarity of the +subject, to his faculties and stage of development; but the exterior +<pb n='035'/><anchor id='Pg035'/> +world as it is in itself we can never apprehend. <hi rend='italic'>Descartes</hi>, starting +with the premise that consciousness is the beginning of all +certainty, was the first modern philosopher to enter upon the way +of subjectivism. He was followed by <hi rend='italic'>Locke</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Berkeley</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>. +It is due to them that in the modern theory of cognition the +fundamental principle of idealistic subjectivism, no matter how +difficult and unreasonable it may appear to an ordinary thinker, +has obtained so many advocates who, nevertheless, cannot adhere +to it, but contradict it at every step. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>The world,</q> <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi> is convinced, <q>is the projection of my +idea.... No truth is more certain, more independent of all others, +less in need of proof, than this, that all there is to be known, hence +the whole world, is an object only in relation to a subject, a vision +of the beholder; in a word, the projection of my own idea. Hence +the subject is the bearer of the world</q> (Die Welt als Wille und +Vorstellung, I, §§ 1-2). <q>It is evidently true that knowledge cannot go +beyond our consciousness, and hence the existence of things outside +of our sphere of consciousness must, to say the least, remain problematical</q> +(Der Gegenstand der Erkenntniss, 1892, p. 2). In like +manner <hi rend='italic'>O. Liebmann</hi> says: <q>We can never go beyond our individual +sphere of ideas (projection of our ideas), even though we apprehend +what is independent of us, still the absolute reality of it is +known to us only as our own idea</q> (Zur Analysis der Wirklichkeit, +1900, p. 28). Therefore <q>the contrast between <q>I</q> and the world,</q> +says <hi rend='italic'>E. Mach</hi>, <q>between feeling or apprehension and the reality, falls +away</q> (Die Analysis der Empfindungen, 2d ed., 1900, p. 9). And +a disciple of <hi rend='italic'>Mach</hi> says: <q>It is important to hold fast to the idea +that a self-existent, divine Truth, independent of the subject, objectively +binding, enthroned, so to say, above men and gods, is meaningless.... +Such a Truth is nonsense</q> (<hi rend='italic'>H. Kleinpeter</hi>, Kantstudien, +VIII, 1903, p. 314). +</p> + +<p> +None of these representatives of worldly wisdom are able to fulfil the +first duty of the wise man: <q>Live according to what you teach.</q> Even +the sceptic <hi rend='italic'>Hume</hi> has to admit that in the common affairs of life he +feels himself compelled of necessity to talk and act like other people. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Subjectivism is really nothing but <emph>scepticism</emph>, for it eliminates +the knowableness of objective truth. But it is a masked—if +you will, a reformed—scepticism. Cognition is given another +purpose; its task is not at all, so it is said, to reproduce +or assimilate a world distinct from itself, but to create its own +contents. The very nature of cognition is reversed. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='036'/><anchor id='Pg036'/> + +<div> +<head>The Autonomy of Reason.</head> + +<p> +It was <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, the herald of a new era in philosophy, who gave +to this gradually maturing subjectivism its scientific form and +basis. At the same time he gave prominence to that element +of subjectivism which seems to give justification to freedom of +thought, to wit, autonomism, the creative power of the intellect +which makes its own laws. Independence of reason and free +thought have become catchwords since <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> time. They are +a precious ingredient of the autonomy of modern man. +</p> + +<p> +When the flaming blaze of the French Revolution was reddening +the skies of Europe, and inaugurating the restoration of +the rights of man, <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> was sitting in his study at Königsberg, +his heart beating strongly in sympathy with the Revolution, +for he saw in it a hopeful turn of the times. An old man of +nearly seventy, he followed the events with most passionate interest. +<hi rend='italic'>Varnhagen</hi> records in his Memoirs, based on the stories +of <hi rend='italic'>Staegemann</hi>, that, when the proclamation of the Republic was +announced in the newspapers, <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, with tears in his eyes, said +to some friends: <q>Now can I say with Simeon, <q>Now dost Thou, +O Lord, dismiss Thy servant in peace, because mine eyes have +seen Thy Salvation</q></q> (<hi rend='italic'>H. Hettner</hi>, Literaturgeschichte des 18. +Jahrh. III, 4th ed., 3, 2, 1894, p. 38). While on the other side +of the Rhine the Jacobins were doing their bloody work of political +liberation, the German philosopher, the herald of a new era +and an ardent admirer of <hi rend='italic'>Rousseau</hi>, sat in his study labouring +for man's intellectual liberation. To give man the right of +autonomous self-determination in action and thought was the +work of his life. Autonomy was indeed to him <q><q>the source</q> +of all dignity of man and of every rational nature</q> (Grundlegung +zur Metaphysik der Sitten, II). And hence it was that +his ardent followers beheld in him <q>the first perfect model +of a really free German, one who had purged himself from every +trace of Roman absolutism, dogmatism, and anti-individualism</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>H. St. Chamberlain</hi>, Die Grundlagen des 19. Jahrh., 8th ed., +1907, II, 1127). +</p> + +<p> +In his <q>Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten</q> (The +Foundation of the Metaphysics of Ethics) and <q>Kritik der praktischen +<pb n='037'/><anchor id='Pg037'/> +Vernunft</q> (Critique of Practical Reason) <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> sought +to establish <emph>autonomy in moral life</emph> and action. Man himself, +his practical reason, is the ultimate foundation of all moral obligation; +did man lead a good life out of obedience to God it +would be a heteronomy unworthy of the name of <q>moral.</q> +<q>The autonomy of the will,</q> he teaches, <q>is the sole principle +of all moral laws and the duties allied to them; all arbitrary +heteronomy, on the contrary, far from having any binding force, +is contrary to the principle of morality of the will</q> (Kritik der +prakt. Vern., Elementarlehre, I, 1, 4. Lehrsatz). Or, as amplified +by a faithful interpreter of the master: <q>In the moral world +the individual should be not only a member but also a ruler; +he is a member of the moral order when he obeys its law; he +is its ruler when he enacts the law.... The distinction between +autonomy and heteronomy separates true from false ethics, +the system of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> from all other systems. All moral systems, +except that of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, are based on the principles of heteronomy; +they can have no other. And critical philosophy was the +first to grasp the principle of autonomy</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kuno Fischer</hi>, +Geschichte der neuen Philosophie, IV, 2d ed., 1869, p. 114 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +<hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> just man no longer prays <q>Thy will be done</q>; he identifies +the law with himself. <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche's</hi> transcendental man is +seen in the background. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Autonomy of thought</emph> is the result of the <q>Critique of +Pure Reason,</q> and in spite of its inconsistency of expression, +its involved sentences, its extremely tiresome style, it is and +will long continue to be the text-book of modern philosophy. +According to <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> our cognition consists in our fashioning the +substance of our perceptions and reasoning after innate, purely +subjective, views and conceptions. Time and place, and especially +the abstract notions of existence and non-existence, necessity, +causality, substance, have no truth independent of our +thought; they are but forms and patterns according to which +we are forced to picture the world. Their first matter is supplied +by sense experience, such as sound, colour, feeling; +but these, too, according to <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, are not objective. Nothing +then remains to our cognition that is not purely subjective, +having existence in ourselves alone. Our cognition is no longer +<pb n='038'/><anchor id='Pg038'/> +a reproduction, but a creation of its object; our thought is +no longer subject to an external truth that may be forced upon it. +<q>Hitherto,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, <q>it has been generally supposed that +our cognition must be governed by objects.... Let us see if we +cannot make better headway in the province of metaphysics by +supposing that objects must be governed by our cognition</q> +(Kritik der Reinen Vernunft, Vorrede zur zweiten Ausgabe). +</p> + +<p> +This is, indeed, nothing but a complete falsification of human +cognition. It is evident to an unbiassed mind that there must +be a reason for everything, not because I so think, but I +think so because such is the fact; that the multiplication table +is right, not because I think so, but I must multiply according +to it simply because it is right. My thought is subject to +objective truth. But <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> autonomy means emancipation from +objective truth, and hence, though <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> himself held fast to +the unchangeable laws of thinking and acting, he energetically +opened the way for subjectivism with all its consequences. This +was <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> doing, and history credits him with it. It was one +of those events which have made men famous: the giving to the +ideas and sentiments of a period their scientific formula, and +thereby also their apparent justification. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Schiller</hi> wrote in 1805 to <hi rend='italic'>W. von Humboldt</hi>: <q>The profound fundamental +ideas of ideal philosophy remain an enduring treasure, and for +this reason alone one should think himself fortunate for having lived +at the present time.... Finally, we are both idealists, and should be +ashamed to have it said of us that things made us and not we the things.</q> +<hi rend='italic'>Fr. Paulsen</hi> gives expression to the opinion of many when he says: +<q><hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> gives to the intellect the self-determination that is essential to +it, and the position in the world which it deserves. He has raised the +intellect's creative power to a position of honour: the essence of the +intellect is freedom</q> (Immanuel Kant, 1898, p. 386). <q>The autonomy +of reason ... we cannot give up</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, Der Philosoph des +Protestantismus, in Philosophia militans, 2d ed., 1901, p. 51). <q>It +is indeed the offspring of Protestantism.</q> <q>To me it is beyond +doubt,</q> <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> continues, <q>that the fundamental tendency of primitive +Protestantism has here been carried out in all clearness</q> (Ibid. 43). +<hi rend='italic'>Luther</hi>, too, found in the heart of the individual the unfailing source +of truth. For that reason <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> has been called the philosopher of +Protestantism. +</p> + +<p> +Hence the well-known historian, <hi rend='italic'>J. Scherr</hi>, may not be wrong +when he calls the philosophy of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> <q>the foundation of granite +whereon is built the freedom of the German intellect.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='039'/><anchor id='Pg039'/> + +<p> +Now, indeed, we easily understand the demand for freedom of +thought. It is unintelligible how an external authority, a divine +revelation or infallible Church, could have ever approached man, +assured him of the truth of its teaching, and laid upon him in +consequence of this testimony the obligation of accepting it as +true. <q>An external authority,</q> we are assured, <q>be it ever +so great, will never succeed in arousing in us a sense of obligation; +its laws, be they ever so lofty and earnest, will be deemed +arbitrary, simply because they come from without</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Sabatier</hi>, +La Religion et la Culture moderne, apud <hi rend='italic'>Fonsegrive</hi>, +Die Stellung der Katholiken gegenueber der Wissenschaft, +Deutsch von <hi rend='italic'>Schieser</hi> (1903), 10). Man accepts only what he +himself has produced, what is congenial to his individuality, +what is in harmony with his personal intellectual life. In the +place of truth steps <q>personal conviction,</q> the shaping of one's +views and ideals; in the place of unselfish submission to the +truth steps the <q>development of one's intellectual individuality,</q> +the <q>evolution of one's intellectual personality</q>; in a +word, free-thought. Exterior authority can no longer impose an +obligation. <q>Is there on earth,</q> asks <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, <q>an instance +where authority can decide for us in matters of belief and +thought?</q> And he answers: <q>There is none; there cannot +be on this earth an infallible teaching authority.</q> And why +not? <q>Philosophy and science must refuse to recognize such an +authority.... If I could believe all that the Church or the +Pope teaches, this one thing I could never believe, that they are +infallible; it would include a resolution, once for all, to renounce +my own judgment regarding whatever they declare true or false, +good or bad; it would be the utter renunciation of the use of +my reason and conscience.</q> (Ibid. 51-53. We shall often cite +the testimony of <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> for the purpose of illustrating modern +thought, partly because he is no longer living, partly because he +is quite an outspoken representative of the modern view of the +world, though generally regarded as moderate. Moreover, he is +without doubt one of the most widely read of the modern German +philosophers.) +</p> + +<p> +The demonstration of all this is quite unique. Here it is in +brief: Were there an infallible authority, one which necessarily +<pb n='040'/><anchor id='Pg040'/> +taught the truth, then thought and science would be irrevocably +subjected to this authority: that will not do; therefore there +is no such authority. Or thus: Were there an infallible teaching, +then we should have to accept it without contradiction: +that is impossible; therefore there is no infallibility. Hence +it is clear, the protest against an infallible authority, even though +divine,—for the argument holds good also in regard to such an +authority,—is not based on the impossibility of teaching the +truth, for the authority is supposed to be infallible, but on man's +refusal to be taught. And this refusal is made in accordance +with that sovereign freedom of thought which is the natural offspring +of subjectivism; the principal renunciation is based on +its denial of objective truth. <emph>It is the rejection of the +truth.</emph> +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>In advanced progress,</q> <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> continues, <q>the individual is also +separating himself from the intellectual mass of the people in order +to enjoy a separate mental existence.... The individual is beginning +to have his own ideas about things; he is no longer satisfied with the +common opinions and notions about the world and life which have +been dealt out to him by religion and mythology: all philosophy begins +with freeing the individual from common notions.</q> <q>If the individual +ideals of a personality, gifted with extraordinary power of mind +and will, happen to come in conflict with the objective morality of +the time, then there results one of those struggles which cause the +dramatic crises of history. They who thus struggled were the real +heroes of mankind. They rose against the conventional and indifferent +ideals which had grown obsolete, against untrue appearances, against +the salt that had lost its savour; they preached a new truth, +pointed out new aspirations and ideals which breathed a new strength +into life and raised it to a higher plane</q> (System der Ethik, 8th ed., +1906, I, 372 f.). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Truly encouraging words for the modern agitator and reformer. +To summon the courage to rise above the level of the +masses, to feel within himself the centre of gravity, and to +fashion his thoughts regardless of the whole world, this is nothing +less than the beginning of philosophy and wisdom. And +should he feel himself strong-minded he may simply change all +moral and religious values which do not square with his individual +judgments. <q>To remain faithful to one's own self,</q> we are +told again, <q>that is the essence of this ideal bravery. No one can +possess this virtue who does not feel within himself the centre +<pb n='041'/><anchor id='Pg041'/> +about which life gravitates; whoever pursues exterior things as +his ultimate end cannot penetrate to interior freedom. <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza</hi>, +by life and teaching, is a great preacher of this freedom</q> +(Ibid. II, p. 27). Self-consciousness as arrogant as that of a +pantheist like <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza</hi>, who indeed did not pursue <q>exterior +things as the ultimate end,</q> nor God either; the self-consciousness +in which man feels himself the centre about which world +and life revolve; the will which now directs thought on its way,—these +are the life-nerves of autonomous free-thought. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In fact, inclination and will, not objective truth, are the measure and +norm of free-thought. This <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> again expresses with astonishing +candour. According to him, intelligence is after all nothing else than +a transformation of the will, this doctrine is rooted in the more modern +voluntaristic monism, and is akin to subjectivism. If our cognition +itself forms its object, then the real concept of cognition has been +lost to us, and in its place we have the will determining the action +even of the intellect. <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> says emphatically, <q>Intelligence is an +instrument of the will in the service of preservation of life.... Perhaps +it can be said that even the elementary formations of thought, +the logical and metaphysical forms of reality, are already codetermined +by the will. If the forms of abstract thought are at all the +result of biological evolution, then this must be accepted: they are +formations and conceptions of reality, which have proved effective and +life-preserving, and have therefore attained their object. The principle +of identity is in reality not a mere statement, not an indicative, but +an imperative: A is A; that is, what I have put down as A shall be +A and remain A.... If this be so, if thought and cognition be determined +fundamentally by the will, then it is altogether unintelligible +how it might finally turn against the will, and force upon it a view +against its will</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> Verhaeltniss zur Metaphysik, 1900, p. 31 f.). +</p> + +<p> +We have to do here with a confusion of ideas possible only when +correct reasoning has sunk to a surprisingly low level. To think with +the will, to draw conclusions with intention, is degenerate thinking. +But now we understand better what is meant by autonomy of thought. +It gives man license to disregard by shallow reasoning everything that +clashes with his own will. <q>What I have put down as A shall be A and +remain A!</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is now clear that subjectivism and autonomism in thinking +are rooted in the positive disregard of objective truth, in the +refusal of an unconditional subjection to it; they mean <emph>emancipation +from the truth</emph>. Here we have the most striking +and <emph>deepest difference</emph> between modern subjectivistic and +Christian objective thought. The latter adheres to the old conviction +that our thoughts do not make the truth, but are subject +<pb n='042'/><anchor id='Pg042'/> +to an objective order of things as a norm. For this reason +autonomous freedom and subjective caprice, a manner of +reasoning that would approach truth as a lawgiver, and even +change it according to time and circumstance, are unintelligible +in the Christian objective thought. This thought submits unselfishly +to truth wherever met, be it without a divine revelation +or with it, if the revelation be but vouched for. And the reward +of this unselfishness is the preservation of the truth. +</p> + +<p> +But subjectivism, with its freedom, leads inevitably to the +loss of the truth; it is scepticism in principle, in fact, if +my thoughts are not a counterpart of an objective world, but +only a subjectively produced image; not knowledge of an external +reality, but only a figment of the imagination, a projection, +then I can have no assurance that they are more than +an empty dream. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Modern Separation of Knowledge and Faith.</head> + +<p> +Of course it would be too much to expect that subjectivism +in modern thought and scientific work should go to the +very limit, viz., to disregard all reasoning, to advance at will any +theory whatever, to silence disagreeable critics by merely referring +to one's autonomy in thinking, and denying that any +one can attain to absolute truth. Errors in empirical speculation +never prosper as others do; the power of natural evidence +asserts itself at every step, and tears down the artificial +cobwebs of apparently scientific scepticism. It asserts +itself less strongly where the opposing power of natural evidence +is weaker, than is the case in matters of actual sense-experience. +Here indeed one sees the objective reality before +him, which he cannot fashion according to his caprice. +The astronomer has no thought of creating his own starry +sky, nor does the archæologist wish to create out of his own +mind the history of ancient nations. They both desire to +know and to reveal the reality. But in the <emph>suprasensible +sphere</emph>, in dealing with questions of the whence and whither of +human life, where there is question of religion and morals, there +autonomy and scepticism assert themselves as though they were +<pb n='043'/><anchor id='Pg043'/> +in their own country, there the free-thinker steps in, boasting +of his independence and taking for his motto the axiom of +ancient sophistry: the measure of all things is man. +</p> + +<p> +Here at the same time the natural product of subjectivism, +sceptic agnosticism, has full sway. In such matters, we +are told, there is no certain truth; nothing can be proved, +nothing refuted: they are all matters of <emph>faith</emph>—not faith, +of course, in the Catholic sense. The latter is the acceptance +by reason of recognized divine testimony, hence an act of the +intellect. The modern so-called faith, on the contrary, is not +an act of the intellect, but is supposed to be a vague <emph>feeling</emph>, +a want, a longing and striving after the divine in one's innermost +soul, which divine is then to be grasped by the soul in +some mysterious way as something immediately present in it. +This feeling is said to emerge from the subconsciousness of the +soul, and to raise in the mind those images and symbols which +we encounter in the doctrines of the various religions, varying +according to times and men. They are only the symbols for that +unutterable experience of the divine, which can be as little +expressed by definitions and tenets as sounds can by colour. It +is a conviction of the ideal and divine, but different from the +conviction of reason; it is an inner, actual experience. Hence +there can no longer be absolute religious truth, no unchangeable +dogmas, which would have to be adhered to forever. In +religion, in views of the world and life, the free feeling of the +human subject holds sway, a feeling that experiences and weaves +together those thoughts and ideals that are in accord with his +individuality. This is the modern doctrine. +</p> + +<p> +The dark mysticism of the ancient East and the agnosticism +of modern times here join hands. This modern method of +separating knowledge and faith is, as we all know, a prominent +feature of modern thought. Knowledge, that is, cognition by +reason, is said to exist only in the domain of the natural +sciences and history. Of what may be beyond these we can +have no true knowledge. Here, too, <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> has led the way; for +the important result of his criticism is his incessant injunction: +we can have true knowledge only of empiric objects, never of +things lying beyond the experience of the senses; our ideas are +<pb n='044'/><anchor id='Pg044'/> +merely subjective constructions of the reason which obtain weight +and meaning only by applying them to objects of sense experiment. +Hence God, immortality, freedom, and the like, remain +forever outside the field of our theoretical or cognitive reason. +Nevertheless <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> did not like to drop these truths. Hence he +constructed for himself a conviction of another kind. The +<q>practical reason</q> is to guide man's action in accomplishing the +task in which her more timid sister, theoretical reason, failed. +And it does it, too. It simply <q>postulates</q> these truths; +they are its <q><emph>postulates</emph>,</q> since without them moral life and +moral order, which it is bound to recognize, would be impossible. +No one knows, of course, whether this be truth, but it +ought to be truth. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Stat pro ratione voluntas.</foreign> The Gordian knot +is cut. <q>It is so,</q> the will now cries from the depths of the +soul, <q>I believe it</q>; while the intellect stands hesitatingly by +protesting <q>I don't know whether it is so or not.</q> Doubt +and conviction embrace each other; Yes and No meet peacefully. +<q>I had to suspend knowledge,</q> <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> suggests, <q>in order to +make room for faith</q> (Kritik der reinen Vernunft, 2. Vorrede). +<q>It is an exigency of pure practical reason based on duty,</q> he +further comments on his postulate, <q>to make something the +highest good, the object of my will, in order to further it with +all my power. Herein, however, I have to assume its possibility, +and therefore its conditions, viz., God, freedom, and immortality, +because I cannot prove them by speculative reason, nor yet +disprove them.</q> Thus <q>the just man may say I wish that +there be a God; I insist upon it, I will not have my faith taken +from me</q> (Kritik der prakt. Vernunft, 1. Teil, 2. Buch, 2 +VIII). +</p> + +<p> +Others have followed the lead of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>. For philosophers, +Protestant theologians, and modernists, he has become the pilot +in whom they trust. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q><hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> critical philosophy,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, <q>gives to knowledge +what belongs to it—the entire world of phenomena, for the freest investigation; +on the other hand, it gives to faith its eternal right, viz., +the interpretation of life and the world according to their value</q> +(Immanuel Kant, 1898, 6). <q>Faith does not simply rest upon proofs, +but upon practical necessity</q>; <q>it does not come from the intellect, +but from the heart and will</q> (Einleitung in die Philosophie, 10th ed., +<pb n='045'/><anchor id='Pg045'/> +1903, 271, 269). <q>Religion is not a science, hence it cannot be proved +nor disproved.</q> <q>Therefore man's view of the world does not depend on +the intellect, but solely on his will.... The ultimate and highest +truths, truths by which man lives and for which he dies, have not their +source in scientific knowledge, but come from the heart and from the +individual will.</q> In a similar strain <hi rend='italic'>R. Falkenberg</hi> writes: <q>The views +of the world growing out of the chronology of the human race, as +the blossoms of a general process of civilization, are not so much +thoughts as rhythms of thinking, not theories but views, saturated with +appreciations.... Not only optimism and pessimism, determinism and +doctrine of freedom, but also pantheism and individualism, idealism +and materialism, even rationalism and sensualism, have their +roots ultimately in the affections, and even while working with the +tools of reason remain for the most part matters of faith, sentiment, +and resolve</q> (Geschichte der neuen Philosophie, 5th ed., 1905, +p. 3). +</p> + +<p> +You may look up any books or magazines of modern philosophy or +Protestant theology, and you will find in all of them <q>that faith is a +kind of conviction for which there is no need of proof</q> (<hi rend='italic'>H. Luedemann</hi>, +Prot. Monatshefte IX, 1903, 367). This emotional faith has been +introduced into Protestant theology especially by <hi rend='italic'>Schleiermacher</hi>. It +is also this view of the more recent philosophy that the modernists +have adopted. They themselves confess: <q>The <emph>modernists</emph> in accord +with modern psychology distinguish clearly between knowledge and +faith. The intellectual processes which lead to them appear to the +modernists altogether foreign to and independent of one another. This +is one of our fundamental principles</q> (Programma dei Modernisti +(1908), 121). +</p> + +<p> +Religious instruction for children will then have to become altogether +different. The demand is already made for <q>a recast of thought +from the sphere of the intellect into the sphere of affection.</q> Away, +so they clamour, away with the dogmas of creation, of Christ as +the Son of God, of His miracles, as taught in the old schools! For +all these are religious ideas. Pupils of the higher grades should be +told <q>the plain truth about the degree of historicity in elementary +religious principles.... The fundamental idea of religion can neither +be created nor destroyed by teaching, it has its seat in sentiment, like—excuse +the term—an insane idea</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Fr. Niebergall</hi>, Christliche Welt, +1909, p. 43). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +This dualism of <q>faith</q> and knowledge is as untenable as +it is common. It is a psychological <emph>impossibility</emph> as well as +a sad <emph>degradation of religion</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +How can I seriously believe, and seriously hold for true, a view +of the world of which I do not know whether it be really true, +when the intellect unceasingly whispers in my ear: it is all imagination! +As long as faith is a conviction so long must it be an +activity of the intellect. With my feeling and will I may indeed +<pb n='046'/><anchor id='Pg046'/> +wish that something be true; but to wish simply that there +be a God is not to be convinced that there actually is a God. +By merely longing and desiring I can be as little convinced +as I can make progress in virtue by the use of my feet, or +repent of sins by a toothache. It is μετάβασις εἰς ἄλλο γένος. +A dualism of this kind, between head and heart, doubt and +belief, between the No of the mind and the Yes of the +heart, is a process incompatible with logic and psychology. +How could such a dualism be maintained for any length of +time? It may perhaps last longer in one in whom a vivid +imagination has dimmed the clearness of intellect; but where +the intellectual life is clear, reason will very soon emancipate +itself from a deceptive imagination. One may go on dreaming +of ideal images, but as soon as the intellect awakens they vanish. +Hallucinations are taken for real while the mind is affected, +but they pass away the moment it sees clearly. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> himself, the father of modern agnostic mysticism, has made +it quite clear that his postulates of faith concerning the existence of +God and the immortality of the soul, have never taken in him the +place of earnest conviction. Thus in the first place <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> holds that +there are no duties towards God, since He is merely a creature of our +mind. <q>Since this idea proceeds entirely from ourselves, and is a +product of ours, we have here before us a postulated being towards +whom we cannot have an obligation; for its reality would have to be +proved first by experience (or revealed)</q>; but <q>to have religion is +a duty man owes to himself.</q> Again, he dislikes an oath, he asks +whether an oath be possible and binding, since we swear only on condition +that there is a God (without, however, stipulating it, as did +<hi rend='italic'>Protagoras</hi>). And he thinks that <q>in fact all oaths taken honestly +and discreetly have been taken in no other sense</q> (Metaphysik der +Sitten, II, § 18, Beschluss). +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Prayer</emph> he dislikes still more. <q>Prayer,</q> he says, <q>as an internal +form of cult, and therefore considered as a means of grace, is a superstitious +delusion (feticism).... A hearty wish to please God in all +our actions, that is, a disposition present in all our actions to perform +them as if in the service of God, is a spirit of prayer that can and +ought to be our perpetual guide.</q> <q>By this desire, the spirit of prayer, +man seeks to influence only himself; by prayer, since man expresses +himself in words, hence outwardly, he seeks to influence God. In the +former sense a prayer can be made with all sincerity, though man does +not pretend to assert the existence of God fully established; in the +latter form, as an address, he assumes this highest Being as personally +present, or at least pretends that he is convinced of its presence, in +the belief that even if it should not be so it can do him no harm, on +<pb n='047'/><anchor id='Pg047'/> +the contrary it may win him favour; hence in the latter form of actual +prayer we shall not find the sincerity as perfect as in the former. The +truth of this last remark any one will find confirmed when he imagines +to himself a pious and well-meaning man, but rather backward in +regard to such advanced religious ideas, surprised by another man while, +I will not say praying aloud, but only in an attitude of prayer; any one +will expect, without my saying so, that that man will be confused, as +if he were in a condition of which he ought to be ashamed. But why +this? A man caught talking aloud to himself raises at once the suspicion +that his mind is slightly deranged; and not altogether wrongly, +because one would seem out of mind if found all alone making +gestures as though he had somebody else before him; that, however, is +the case in the example given</q> (Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der +blossen Vernunft, 4. Stueck, 2, § 4, Allgemeine Anmerkung). Thus it +happens that in his opinion those who have advanced in perfection cease +to pray. +</p> + +<p> +Nor does it seem that <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> is serious about his postulate of the +<emph>immortality</emph> of the soul. Asked by <hi rend='italic'>Lacharpe</hi> what he thought of the +soul, he did not answer at first, but remarked, when the question was repeated: +<q>We must not make too much boast of it</q> (<hi rend='italic'>H. Hettner</hi>, +Literat. Gesch. des 18. Jahrh., III, 4. ed., 3, p. 26. From <hi rend='italic'>Varnhausen's</hi> +Denkwuerdigkeiten). +</p> + +<p> +Thousands have with <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> destroyed their religious conviction by +a boastful scepticism, and, like him, finally given it up to replace its +lack by artificial autosuggestions. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +And is not the religious life of man thereby made completely +valueless? The highest truths on which the mind of man +lives, and which from the first stage of his existence not only +interested but deeply stirred him, become fiction, pictures of +the fancy, suggestions of an effeminate mind, that cannot +make a lasting impression on stronger minds. And how can +the products of autosuggestion give comfort and strength in +hours of need and trial? It is true they do not impose any +obligations. Every one is free to form his own notions of life; +they are not to be taken seriously anyway, whether they be this +or that; they are all equally true and equally false. Buddhism +is just as true as Christianity, Materialism as true as Spiritualism, +Mohammedanism as true as Quakerism, the wisdom of the +Saints as true as the philosophy of the worldly. <q>The most +beautiful flower is growing on the same soil (that of the emotions) +with the rankest weed</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi>). The decision rests +with sentiments which admit of no arguing. Thus all is made +over to scepticism, to that constant doubting which degrades +<pb n='048'/><anchor id='Pg048'/> +and unnerves the higher life of modern times, to that <emph>modern +agnosticism</emph> which, though bearing the distinction of aristocratic +reserve, is in reality dulness and poverty of intellect; not +a perfection of the human intellect, but a hideous disease, all the +more dangerous because difficult to cure. It is the neurasthenia +of the intellect of which the physical neurasthenia of our +generation is the counterpart. +</p> + +<p> +The distinguishing mark between man and the lower animals +has ever been held to be that the former could knowingly step +beyond the sphere of the senses, into that world of which his +intellect is a part. The conviction has always prevailed that +man by means of his own valid laws of thought, for instance, the +principle of causality, could safely ascend from the visible world +to an invisible one. Thus also the physician concludes the interior +cause of the disease from the exterior symptoms, the +physicist thus comes to the knowledge of the existence of atoms +and ions which he has never seen, and the astronomer calculates +with <hi rend='italic'>Leverrier</hi> the existence and location of stars which no eye +has yet detected. +</p> + +<p> +One thing has certainly been established: a <emph>free sentiment</emph> +can now assert itself with sovereignty in the most important +spheres of intellectual life, without any barriers of +stationary truths and immovable Christian dogmas; one is now +free to fashion his religion and ideals to suit the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>individuum +ineffabile</foreign>. The latter asks no longer what religion demands +of him, but rather how religion can serve his purposes. <q>For +the gods,</q> it is said, <q>which we now acknowledge, are those +we need, which we can use, whose demands confirm and +strengthen our own personal demands and those of our fellow-men.... +We apply thereby only the principle of elimination +of everything unsuitable to man, and of the survival of the fittest, +to our own religious convictions</q>; <q>we turn to that religion +which best suits our own individuality</q> (<hi rend='italic'>W. James</hi>). Arrogant +doubt can now undermine all fundamental truths of Christian +faith until they crumble to pieces; beside it rises the free +genius of the new religion, on whose emblem the name of God +is no longer emblazoned, but the glittering seal of an independent +humanity. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='049'/><anchor id='Pg049'/> + +<div> +<head>Relative Truth.</head> + +<p> +Freedom of thought appears still more justified when we take +a further step which brings us to the <emph>consequence of subjectivism</emph>; +<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, when we advance so far as to assert that there are +no unchangeable and in this sense no absolute truths, but only +temporary, changeable, relative truths. And modern thought +does profess this: there is no absolute truth, no <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>religio et philosophia +perennis</foreign>; different principles and views are justified +and even necessary for different times and even classes. This +removes another barrier to freedom of thought, viz., allegiance to +generally accepted truths and to the convictions of bygone ages. +</p> + +<p> +The logicalness of this further step can hardly be denied. +If the human intellect, independent of the laws of objective truth, +fashions its own object and truth, especially in things above the +senses, why can it not form for itself, at different periods and in +different stages of life, a different religion and another view of +the world? Cannot the human subject pass through different +phases? He indeed changes his costume and style of architecture; +why not also his thoughts? Every product of thought +would then be the right one for the time, but would be untenable +for a further stage of his intellectual genesis and growth, and +would have to be replaced by a new one. The nature of subjectivistic +thought is no longer an obstacle to this. Besides, we +have the modern idea of <emph>evolution</emph>, already predominant in +all fields: the world, the species of plants and animals, man +himself with his whole life, his language, right, family, all of +them the products of a perpetual evolution, everything constantly +changing. Why not also his religion, morality, and view +of the world? They are only reflexes of a temporary state +of civilization. Hence also here motion and change, evolution +into new shapes! +</p> + +<p> +Therefore, so it is said, we have now broken definitely with +the <q>dogmatic method of reasoning</q> of the belief in revelation, +and of scholastic philosophy which adhered to absolute +truth. They are replaced by the historical-genetical reasoning of +the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>saeculum historicum</foreign> which <q>has discarded absolute truth: +there are only relative, no eternal truths</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, Immanuel +<pb n='050'/><anchor id='Pg050'/> +Kant, 1898, 389). We are further assured that <q>this +treatment of the history of thought prevails in the scientific +world; the Catholic Church alone has not adopted it. She +still clings to dogmatic reasoning, and that is natural to her; +she is sure that she is in possession of the absolute truth</q> +(Idem, Philosophia militans, 2d ed., 1901, 5). Outside of +this Church every period of time is free to construct its +own theories, which will eventually go with it as they came +with it. +</p> + +<p> +We meet this relative truth, and all the indefinable hazy +notions identified with it, <emph>in all spheres</emph>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The modern history of philosophy and religion concedes to every +system and religion the right to their historic position: they are necessary +phases of evolution. The notion of immutable problems and truths +by which any system of thought would have to be measured has been +lost. <q>The appearance and rejection of a system,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>J. E. +Erdmann</hi>, <q>is a necessity of world-history. The former was demanded +by the character of the time which the system reflected, the latter +again is demanded by the fact that the time has changed</q> (Grundriss +der Geschichte der Philosophie, 3rd, I, 1878, 4). And Professor <hi rend='italic'>Eucken</hi> +says: <q>Despite all its advantages, such a view and construction of life +is not a definite truth, it remains an attempt, a problem that always +causes new discord among minds</q> (Grundlinien einer neuen Lebensanschauung, +1907, 2). <q>Thus, if according to <hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi> the coming into being +constitutes the truth of being, the ideals and aims also must share in +the mobility, and truth becomes a child of the times (<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>veritas temporis +filia</foreign>). That apparently subjects life to a full-blown relativism, but +such a relativism has lost all its terror by the deterioration of the +older method of reasoning. For agreement with existing truth is no +longer its chief object.</q> (Geistige Stroemungen der Gegenwart, 1904, +p. 197). The new theory of knowledge assures us quite generally: <q>It +is a vain attempt to single out certain lasting primitive forms of consciousness, +acknowledged constant elements of the mind, to retain +them. Every <q>a-priori</q> principle which is thus maintained as an unalienable +dowry of thought, as a necessary result of its psychological and +physiological <q>disposition,</q> will prove an obstacle of which the progress +of science will steer clear sooner or later</q> (<hi rend='italic'>E. Cassirer</hi>, Das Erkenntnissproblem +in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit, +1906, 6). +</p> + +<p> +That this relativism is also laying hand, more and more firmly, upon +modern ethics is well known. One often gets the conviction that, as +<hi rend='italic'>E. Westermark</hi> teaches, <q>there is no absolute standard of morality,</q> +that <q>there are no general truths,</q> <q>that all moral values,</q> as Prof. <hi rend='italic'>R. +Broda</hi> writes, <q>are relative and varying with every people, every civilization, +every society, every free person</q> (Dokumente des Fortschritts, +1908, 362). +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='051'/><anchor id='Pg051'/> + +<p> +Thus modern subjectivism has lost all sense for definite rules +of thought; in its frantic rush for freedom and in its confused +excitement it seeks to upset all barriers. Now, of course, we may +disregard convictions thousands of years old, by simply observing +that they suited former ages but not the present; that they +perhaps suit the uneducated but not the educated. Henceforth +one may also reject the dogmas of <emph>Christianity</emph> by +merely pointing out that they were at one time of importance, +but are not suited to the modern man. That is an idea readily +grasped, one which has already become quite general with +those who are mentally tired of Christianity. What is demanded +is a further evolution also of the Christian religion, a continuous +cultivation of freer, higher forms, an undogmatic Christianity +without duty to believe, without a Church: nothing else, in +the end, but a veiled humanitarian religion. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>It will be difficult for coming generations to understand,</q> says +<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, in the same sense, <q>how our time could cling in religious instruction +with such peace of mind to a system which, having originated +several centuries ago under entirely different conditions of intellectual +life, stands in striking contrast to facts and ideas accepted by our time +everywhere outside the schools.</q> Hence a revision of the fundamental +truths of Christianity is needed. Away with everything supernatural +and miraculous, obedience to faith, original sin, redemption: +all this sounds strange to the modern man. <q>So there remains but one +way: to adapt the doctrine of the Church to the theories and views +of our times</q> (System der Ethik, 8th ed., 1906, II, pp. 247, 250). +And <hi rend='italic'>Eucken</hi> says similarly: <q>We can adopt the doctrinal system of the +Church only by retiring from the present back to the past</q> (Zeitschr. +fuer Philosophie u. Phil. Kritik 112, 1898, 165). Therefore we demand +evolution of the Christian religion! <q>Let us not blindly follow antiquated +doctrines disposed of by science,</q> we are exhorted. <q>Let +there be no fear lest our belief in God and true piety suffer by it! +Let us remember that everything earthly is in continual motion, carried +along by the rushing river of life.</q> Onward, therefore, to advancement! +... cheerfully avowing the watchword: <q>evolution of religion</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Fr. Delitzsch</hi>, Zweiter Vortrag ueber Babel u. Bibel, 45. thousand, +1904, 42). +</p> + +<p> +Modern Protestant theology has achieved a great deal in this direction; +its evolution has progressed to a complete disintegration of Christianity, +by adapting it to modern ideas so thoroughly that there is not a +single thought left which this Christianity, reduced to meaningless +words, might not accept. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +This is the relativism of the present subjectivistic reasoning +and its consequences. +</p> + +<pb n='052'/><anchor id='Pg052'/> + +<p> +Now, it is true that there is room for a certain relativity +and evolution in the field of thought and truth. There is a +relative truth in the sense that our knowledge of it is never exhaustive. +Even the eternal truths of the Christian religion we +always know only imperfectly, and we ought to perfect our +knowledge continually; established facts of history can also be +known, if studied, in greater detail. Thus there is progress +and evolution. But from this we may not conclude that +there can be no fixed truths at all. In the astronomy of to-day +one can surely have the conviction that the fundamental truths +of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus's</hi> System of the Universe must remain an unchangeable +truth, and that the time will never come when we +shall go back to the obsolete doctrines of old <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi>, who made +the sun revolve around the earth. Is astronomy therefore +excluded from progress and evolution? It is moreover true +that the individual as well as the community pass through an +intellectual evolution in the sense that they gradually increase +their knowledge and correct their errors, that literature and the +schools gradually enhance the energy and wealth of our ideas +and thoughts. +</p> + +<p> +But a progressive change of the laws of thought, to the effect +that we must now hold to a proposition which at another time +we should naturally reject as untenable, can be maintained only +upon the supposition that the thought of evolution has driven +all others out of the intellect. It would be absurd to hold that +the same view could be true at one time and false at another, that +the same views about the world and life could be right to-day +and wrong to-morrow, to be accepted to-day and rejected to-morrow. +A view is either true or false. If true, it is always +true and warranted. Or was old <hi rend='italic'>Thales</hi> right when he declared +the world to consist of water; were <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> right +in maintaining that it consisted of ideas, or forms, with real +existences; was <hi rend='italic'>Fichte</hi> and his time right with his Ego, and +are finally <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> right in claiming +the world to be the work of the will? Were our heroic ancestors +right, as the theories of evolution claim, in holding that +trees are inhabited by ghosts; were then the Greeks right with +their idea of a host of gods dwelling in the Olympus; and later +<pb n='053'/><anchor id='Pg053'/> +on, was the civilized world right in holding that there is but one +God, a personal one; and, after that, are many others of to-day +right when they tell us that the world, and nature itself, is god? +These are conclusions that threaten confusion to the human +brain. And yet they are the logical consequences of <q>relative +truth,</q> and any one reluctant to accept these consequences +would prove thereby that he has never realized what absurdities +are marketed as relative truth. +</p> + +<p> +Or shall we give it up, as entirely impossible, to judge of +the truth or falseness of doctrines and views? Are we to +value them only so far as they are adapted to a period, and as +moulding and benefiting that period? This opinion indeed is +held. <q>The values of science and philosophy,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, +<q>of our arts and poetry, consist in what they give us; whether +a distant future will still use them is very questionable. +Scholastic philosophy has passed away; we use it no longer; +that is, however, no proof against its value; if it has made the +generations living in the latter half of the Middle Ages more +intelligent and wise ... then it has done all that could rightfully +be expected of it: having served its purpose, it may be laid +with the dead: there is no philosophy of enduring value.</q> +<q>Whatever new ideas a people produces from its own inner +nature will be beneficial to it. Nature may be confidently expected +to produce here and everywhere at the right time what +is proper and necessary</q> (System der Ethik, 8th ed., 1906, I, +339, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>, II, 241). +</p> + +<p> +We have here a very deplorable misconception of the real value +of truth, degrading it to suit passing interests and to promote +them. This also is in conformity with subjectivism. But +what could be answered to the straight question: suppose +the opinions which some prefer to call <q>false</q> are more useful +and valuable than <q>truth</q>? None but <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> had the +courage to say that <q>the falsity of a judgment is not yet a +sufficient prejudice against it; here our new speech will +perhaps sound strangest. The question is: How far is that +judgment life-promoting, life-sustaining, preservative, even creative +of species, and we are inclined, on principle, to say that the +falsest judgments are to us the most indispensable</q> (Jenseits +<pb n='054'/><anchor id='Pg054'/> +von Gut und Boese, I, 4, W. W. VII, 12.) The view that doctrines +and opinions become especially or exclusively true and +valuable by their usefulness for practical life, has become in our +times the principle of pragmatism. +</p> + +<p> +What others thought out only half way, <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> reasons out +to the end. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +To what lengths this contempt of objective truth may lead a man of +such an honest character as <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, is learned from his advice to +the modern Protestant preacher who can no longer believe what he +has to preach to his orthodox congregation: he may speak just as +suits his congregation, orthodox as well as unorthodox, according to +the principles of relative truth. <q>Let us assume,</q> he says, <q>that his +congregation is of a remote country village, where not the slightest +report of the happenings in theology and literature has penetrated, +where the names of <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Renan</hi> are as little heard as those +of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Schleiermacher</hi>. Here the Bible is still taken to be the +literal Word of God, transmitted to us by holy men commissioned to +do it. In this case the preacher may speak without scruple of that book +in the same way as his present hearers are used to. Would he +thus be saying what is wrong? What is meant by saying the Bible +is the Word of God? The same preacher, if transferred to other surroundings +where he has to address readers of <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, may +change his manner of speaking without changing his view or without +violating the truth one way or the other. He would be speaking to +them from their own point of view.... Again, should the same +preacher publish his philosophical scientific research, he could speak of +Holy Scripture in an entirely different way....</q> And he adds: +<q>Some have taken exception to this opinion.</q> Surely not without +reason! +</p> + +<p> +A justification of this counsel was attempted in these words: +</p> + +<p> +<q>Just as the electric incandescent light and the tallow-candle may +exist side by side, and as each of them may serve its purpose in its +proper place, so there exist also side by side various physical and +metaphysical ideas and fundamental notions: the scientist and the +philosopher and the old grandmother in her cottage on the remote +mountain-side, cannot think of the world in the same way</q> (Ethik +II, 240-244). But the argument, if it should prove anything, must +be formulated thus: <q>As the incandescent light can at the same time be +a tallow-candle, just so can two different and opposite views about one +and the same thing be at the same time both right.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Thus, thanks to the science of modern subjectivism, every +fixed and unchangeable truth, especially in the sphere of philosophy +and religion, is removed, and with it also every barrier to +freedom of thought in science as well as elsewhere. The human +<pb n='055'/><anchor id='Pg055'/> +intellect in its autonomous self-consciousness may not only +reject those truths which are proposed by revelation or the +Church; it may not only experience its views of religion and +the world by giving free activity to its feelings, it also knows that +to be no longer satisfied with the old truths means to be +progressive. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +Above we have sketched the deeper-lying thoughts on which +the liberal freedom of science is based; it is the humanitarian +view of the world with its emancipation of man, and autonomous +scepticism in thought, joined to that sceptical disregard +of truth which once the representative of expiring pagan +antiquity comprised in the words: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Quid est veritas?</foreign> Now we +also understand better the liberal science which often claims +the privilege of being <q>the</q> science, and which only too often +likes to put down as unwarranted and inferior every other science +that does not pursue its investigations in the same way. +We understand its methods of thought in philosophy and religion, +for which it claims an exclusive privilege; we can also +form a judgment of its claim to be the leader of humanity in +place of faith. +</p> + +<p> +No doubt there are many who are flirting with this freedom +without accepting its principles entirely. They do not reason +out the thing to the end, they argue against the invasion of the +Church into the field of science, and point to <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>; they +denounce Index and Syllabus, and then believe they have therewith +exhausted the meaning of freedom of science. That the +real matter in question is a view of the world diametrically opposed +to the Christian view, that a changed theory of cognition +is underlying it, is by many but insufficiently realized. +</p> + +<p> +This freedom is not acceptable to one who professes the +Christian view of the world. He will not offer any feeble apology +to the eulogist of this freedom, as, for instance: Indeed +you are quite right about your freedom, but please remember +that I, too, as a faithful Christian am entitled to profess freedom. +No; the answer can only be: Freedom, yes; but <emph>this</emph> +freedom, no. A wholly different view of the world separates +me from it. I see in it not freedom but rebellion, not the +<pb n='056'/><anchor id='Pg056'/> +rights of man but upheaval, not a real boon of mankind but +real danger. +</p> + +<p> +The principle of liberalism has in the field of social economy +already done enough to wreck man's welfare. It has here +proved its incompetence as a factor of civilization. That in +science also, where it is active in the field of philosophy +and religion, liberalism is the principle of overthrowing true +science, without any appreciation for truth and human nature, +that it is a principle of intellectual pauperism and decay, that +it despoils man of his greatest treasures, inherited from better +centuries—this we shall prove conclusively. +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult to say how long the high tide of liberalism will +sweep over the fields of modern intellectual life before it subsides. +One thing, however, is certain, that just so long it will +remain a danger to Christian civilization, and to the intellectual +life of mankind. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='057'/><anchor id='Pg057'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Second Section. Freedom of Research and Faith.</head> + +<pb n='059'/><anchor id='Pg059'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter I. Research And Faith In General.</head> + +<div> +<head>Introduction.</head> + +<p> +When the youth growing to maturity begins to feel the +development of his own strength, it may happen that he +finds his dependence on home unbearably trying. Perhaps he +will say, <q>Father, give me the portion of substance that falleth +to me,</q> and then depart into a strange country. +</p> + +<p> +The men of Europe have for centuries lived in the Christian +religion as in their fathers' house, and have fared well. But +to many children of our time the old homestead has become +too confining. Modern man, we are told, has at last come to his +senses. He wants to develop his personality, thoughts, and sentiments +freely, independently of every authority. He turns his +back on his father's house. His parting words are the accusation: +The old Church <q>opposes the modern principles of free +individuality, the right to drain the cup of one's own reason +and personal life, and it sets itself against the whole of modern +feeling, investigation, and activity</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Th. Ziegler</hi>, Gesch. +der Ethik, II, 2d ed., 1892, p. 589). +</p> + +<p> +We are already acquainted with this freedom. We approach +now the main question: What is the true relation of the freedom, +which man may rightly claim for his scientific activity and +reason, to external laws and regulations? Is man really justified +to reject them all on the plea that they degrade his intellect +and are an obstacle to his development, or does this rejection +but manifest an error into which his desire of freedom +has decoyed him? This is the question, it will be remembered, +that we reached soon in the beginning of our investigation. +We have already found the categorical answer—an emphatic +rejection of such justification; we also traced the hypotheses on +<pb n='060'/><anchor id='Pg060'/> +which the answer rests. We now return to the question to +discuss it in principle. We begin with the freedom of scientific +<emph>research</emph>, in order to take up afterwards the freedom in +<emph>teaching</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +What are those external powers that may interrupt or caution +the scientist in his investigations and problems? Here we +do not yet consider the scientist as a teacher, communicating to +the public the result of his investigation, his ideas and views, +from the university chair to his scientific audience, or to a +wider circle of hearers by means of publications; we here regard +him in his private study only, in the pursuit of which he perhaps +encounters new questions, and new solutions suggest themselves +to him. What freedom can he and must he enjoy here? +This private freedom must evidently be judged from a point of +view other than that from which the freedom in teaching should +be judged. With the latter, the interests of his contemporaries +must be taken into account, and the question must be considered, +whether they suffer by such teaching. The freedom of the +scientist is greater than that of the teacher. Moreover, research +is the principal and most important activity of science: +nothing, surely, is taught that has not been previously investigated. +If, therefore, research is in any way restricted, so also is +teaching; but not <hi rend='italic'>vice versa</hi>. Are there, then, exterior authorities +that may restrain research and reasoning, and what are +they? +</p> + +<p> +One who lives in the Christian world knows at once of what +authority to think. It is not the state. The state cannot directly +influence the private work of the student: if it may exert +its influence directly upon anything, it is only upon freedom in +teaching. No, the authority to think of is the authority of +the faith, revealed religion and its guardian, the Church. +</p> + +<p> +Of course, this is not the only authority. Even if a revelation +from heaven had not been given us, yet those <emph>general convictions +of mankind</emph>, common to all nations and times, of the +immutability of the laws of thought and morality, of the existence +of a supramundane God, of the retribution for moral +conduct to be made in the world to come, of the sanctity of +state-authority, of the necessity of private property, and others, +<pb n='061'/><anchor id='Pg061'/> +would ever remain most revered utterances of truth. No one +would be allowed to contradict this avowal of all mankind, +relying on his own reasoning, which he calls science, and give +the lie to the reasoning of all other men, in order to make +his own reason the sole measure of truth. +</p> + +<p> +But for the present let us pass over the natural authority +of mankind, of its convictions and traditions. It is surpassed +and replaced by the <emph>authority of faith</emph> which belongs to <emph>our +Christian religion</emph>. The latter comes to us claiming to possess +the only true view of the world, and laying upon us the +obligation of accepting it. It has even the courage to put its +anathema upon propositions which the scientist may call science; +it dares write out a list of the propositions which it condemns +as untenable. Against this authority the protest is raised: +Where is freedom of research, if one cannot even indulge +in his own ideas, if the intellect is to be cropped and fettered? +What is to become of frank, unprejudiced investigation, if I am +from the outset bound to certain propositions, if from the outset +the result at which I must arrive is already determined? It is +intellectual bondage that the man of faith is languishing in. +Thus reads the indictment; thus sounds the battle-cry. Is the +indictment justified? Can and shall science take faith as +a guide in many instances without detriment to its own innate +freedom? And where, and when? +</p> + +<p> +First, the more general question: Is freedom of research +compatible with the duty to believe, or do they exclude each +other in principle? +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>What Faith is Not.</head> + +<p> +What, then, is faith, and what does the duty to believe demand +of us? +</p> + +<p> +Here we meet at once with a false proposition which the opponents +of the Christian faith will not abandon. To them faith +is always a blind assent, in giving which one does not ask, nor +dare ask, whether the proposition be true—<emph>a belief without +personal conviction</emph>. According to them the believer holds +himself <q>captive to the teaching of his Church. He cannot reflect +personally, but follows blindly the lead of authority and +<pb n='062'/><anchor id='Pg062'/> +force of habit.</q> Thus <q>Catholicism is the religion of bondage</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>W. Wundt</hi>, Ethik, 3d ed., 1903, II, 255, 254). To them it is but +an <q>uncritical submission to the existing authority, uninfluenced +either by the testimony of the senses or the reflection of +the intellect</q> (<hi rend='italic'>K. Menger</hi>, Neue Freie Presse, 24 Nov., 1907). +The campaign for liberal science is denouncing those who +<q>even to-day dare to demand blind faith,</q> <q>without proof or +criticism,</q> faith in the <q>word of the Popes and men pretending +to be interpreters and emissaries of God, men who have +proved their incompetence and inability by the physical and +religious coercion to which they have subjected mankind</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>T. G. Masaryk</hi>, V boji o nábozenstvi, The Battle for Religion, +1904, p. 10, 23). +</p> + +<p> +To be sure, if the Christian faith were such, it would be intellectual +slavery. If I am compelled to believe something of +which I cannot know the truth, this is coercion, and conflicts +with the nature of the intellect and its right to truth. Infidelity +would then be liberation. But faith is <emph>not</emph> that. +</p> + +<p> +As a rule this view is based on a presumption, which has +already been extensively discussed, viz., that faith and religion +have nothing at all to do with intellectual activity, but are +merely the <emph>product of the heart</emph>, a sentimental, freely acting +notion; for, of metaphysical objects no human intellect +can form a certain conviction. It is subjectivism that leads to +this view. According to it the subject creates its own world of +thought, free in action and feeling, not indeed everywhere,—in +the sphere of sense-experience the evidence of the concrete is +too great,—but at least in the sphere of metaphysical truth. +</p> + +<p> +Such modes of expression find their way also into Catholic +literature and language; even here we meet with the assertion +that religion is a matter of the heart, and for that very reason +has nothing to do with science. On the whole it is a remarkable +fact that among believing men many expressions are current +that have been coined in the mint of modern philosophy, and +have there received a special significance. They are used without +real knowledge of their origin and purposed meaning; but the +words do not fail to colour their ideas, and to create imperceptibly +a strange train of thought. +</p> + +<pb n='063'/><anchor id='Pg063'/> + +<p> +One who is of the opinion that religion and views of the +world are but sentiment and feeling, which change with one's personality +and individuality, can, of course, no longer understand +a dogmatic Christianity and the obligation to hold fast to clearly +defined dogmas as unchangeable truth. I can hold dogmas and +doctrinal decisions to be unquestionably true only when I can +<emph>convince myself of their credibility</emph> by the judgment of my +reason. If I cannot do that, and am still bound to believe +them, without the least doubt, then such obedience is compulsory +repression of the reason. Then it would indeed be necessary +for the Church, as <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> says, <q>to instil into its flock a pious +dread of the least deviation from certain articles of faith based +on history, and a dread of all investigation, to such a degree +that they dare not let a doubt rise, even in thought, against the +articles proposed for their belief, because this would be tantamount +to lending an ear to the evil spirit</q> (Religion innerhalb +der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 3. Stueck, 2. Abtlg.). Fixed +dogmas may then at the very most, according to the great +master of modern thought, be of pedagogic value to a +minor, until he be grown to maturity. But to more advanced +minds must be unconditionally conceded the freedom to construct +dogmas as they think best, viz., as symbols and images +for the subjective thought they underlie. This also, as is well +known, is an article of Modernism, which here again follows in +the steps of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Ecclesiastical faith,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, <q>may be useful as a vehicle to +minors who can grasp a purely rational religion only through symbols, +until in the course of time, owing to the general enlightenment, they +can with the consent of everybody exchange the form of degrading +means of coercion for an ecclesiastical form suitable to the dignity of +a moral religion—that of free faith.</q> <q>The membranes,</q> he says +in another place, <q>in which the embryo first shaped itself into man +must be cast off, if he is to see the light of day. The apron-strings of +sacred tradition with its appendages, viz., the statutes and observances +which at one time did good service, can gradually be dispensed with; +they may even become a harmful hindrance when one is growing to +manhood.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Of course, to him who takes the position of <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> <emph>dualism +of belief and rational judgment</emph>, freedom from every authority +<pb n='064'/><anchor id='Pg064'/> +in matters of faith, and in this sense tolerance, will +appear to be self-evident. Whatever has nothing to do with +knowledge, but is merely the personal result of an inner, subjective +experience, cannot be offered by external authority as matter +for instruction. The sole standard for this belief is the autonomous +subject and its own needs. In this sense <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> tells +us: <q>The kernel of one's being is to be grasped in its own +depths and the soul is merely to recognize its own needs and the +road traced out for their gratification. This can only be done +with the fullest freedom. Any restraint here is tantamount to +the destruction of the problem; any submission to the teaching +of others ... is treason to one's own religion</q> (Religioeser +Glaube und freie Forschung. Neue Freie Presse, 7. Juni, 1908). +To have one's religion determined by any authority, even a +divine one, would be treason to the sovereignty of man! +</p> + +<p> +Viewed from this standpoint, the <emph>reconciliation between +faith and science</emph> is no longer a problem. And they congratulate +themselves on the solution of this vexing question. +Now, they say, deliverance from an oppressive misery has been +found, now the peace sought for so long is restored. A fair +division has been made: two worlds, the world of the senses, and +the world above sense experience. One belongs to science, where +it now rules supreme; the other belongs to faith, where it can +move freely, undisturbed by, and even unapproachable to +science. Just as the stars in the sky are inaccessible to the custodian +of civil order,—he can neither support them nor hinder +them, nor pull them down,—just so the realm of faith is inaccessible +to science: peace reigns everywhere. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Cheered on by this treaty of peace, <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> writes: <q>Thus critical +philosophy has solved the old problem of the relation of knowledge to +faith. <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> is convinced that by properly setting the limits he has succeeded +in laying the foundation for real and enduring peace between +them. In fact, upon this in the first place will rest the importance and +vitality of his philosophy. It gives to knowledge, on the one hand, what +belongs to it for unlimited research, the whole world of phenomena; on +the other hand it gives to faith its eternal right, the interpretation of +life and the world from the view-point of values. There can be no doubt +that herein lies the cause of the great impression made by <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> upon +his time; he appeared as the liberator from unbearable suspense</q> (Immanuel +Kant, 1898, 6). +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='065'/><anchor id='Pg065'/> + +<p> +To a critical observer, such peace-making is utterly incomprehensible. +They probably did not consider that in this way +<emph>religion and faith</emph> were not liberated, but <emph>dispossessed</emph>; not +brought to a place of safety, but transferred from the realm of +reality into the realm of fancy. Similarly an aggressive ruler +might address a neighbouring prince thus: We cannot agree any +longer, let us make peace: you retain all your titles, and I shall +see to your decent support, but you will have to lay down your +crown and sovereignty and leave the country—in this way we +can have peace. Religion, once the greatest power in the life +of man, for the sake of which man made sacrifices and even +laid down his life, has now become a matter of sterile devotion; +it may, moreover, no longer claim power and importance; it +is now reduced to a poetic feeling, with which one can fill up +intellectual vacancies. No longer is man here for religion's sake; +religion is here for man's sake. A buttonhole flower, a poetic +perfume to sprinkle over his person. For he does not want to +give up religion entirely. <q>We are the less inclined to give up +religion forthwith, since we are prone to consider a religious disposition +as a prerogative of human nature, even as its noblest +title.</q> Thus <hi rend='italic'>D. F. Strauss</hi>, when he asked of those who sympathized +with his opinions, Have we still religion? (Der alte u. +neue Glaube, II, n. 33). Of course religion has now become +something quite different; it has been <emph>consigned to deep +degradation</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +To be sure, feeling is of great importance in religion. Dissatisfaction +with the things of this earth, man's longing for +something higher, for the Infinite, his craving for immortality, +for aid and consolation—are all naturally seeking for religious +truths. If these are known, they in turn arouse fear and hope, +love and gratitude; they become a source of happiness and inspiration. +But these feelings have no meaning unless we are +certain that there exists something corresponding to them; much +less could they of themselves be a conviction, just as little as +hunger could convince us that we have food and drink. If one +cannot perceive that there is a God, a Providence, a life beyond, +then religion sinks to the level of a hazy feeling, without +reason and truth, which must appear foolish to men who think,—as +<pb n='066'/><anchor id='Pg066'/> +<q>the great phantasmagoria of the human mind, which we +call religion</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>, Gedanken über Reform Katholizismus, +1902, 12),—which departs from the sphere of rational intellectual +life, and which many have even begun to contemplate +from the view-point of psychopathology. It is only due to the +after-effect of a more religious past that religion is suffered to +lead still a life of pretence: moral support in struggles it can +give no more, nor comfort in dark hours, much less may it presume +to guide man's thought. It stands far below science. +</p> + +<p> +Despair of the possibility of knowing higher truths is confronting +us, the disease of deteriorating times and intellectually +decaying nations. But just as Christianity, once in +youthful vigour, went to the rescue of an old World dying of +scepticism, just as the Catholic Church has ever upheld the +rights of reason, especially against Protestantism, which from +its beginning has torn asunder faith and knowledge: so the +Catholic Church stands to this day unaffected by the doubting +tendency of our times, upholding the rights of reason. It also +upholds faith. But its faith has nothing to do with modern +agnosticism. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>What Faith Is.</head> + +<p> +What, then, according to Catholic doctrine, is faith and the +duty to believe? +</p> + +<p> +Let us briefly recall to mind the <emph>fundamental tenets</emph> of the +<emph>Christian religion</emph>. It tells us that even in the Old Testament, +but more especially in the New, through His Incarnate +Son, God has revealed to man all those religious and moral +truths which are necessary and sufficient for the attainment of +his supernatural end. Some of them are truths which reason +by itself could not discover; others it could discover, but only +by great labour. And this divine revelation demands belief. +Belief is natural to man. The child believes its parents, the +judge believes the witnesses, the ruler believes his counsellors. +God wished to meet man in this way, and to give him certainty +in regard to the highest truths. +</p> + +<p> +But revelation was to be an heritage of mankind, it was to be +transmitted and laid unadulterated before all generations. For +<pb n='067'/><anchor id='Pg067'/> +this reason it could not be left unprotected to the vicissitudes of +time, or the arbitrary interpretation of the individual. It +would have utterly failed in its purpose of transmitting sure +knowledge of certain truth,—the history of Protestantism +proves this,—had it been given merely with the injunction: +Receive what I have committed to your keeping, and do with it +what you please. No, it had to be made secure against subjective, +arbitrary choice. +</p> + +<p> +To this end Christ established an international organization, +the <emph>Church</emph>, and committed to it His Gospel as a means of +grace, together with the right and sacred duty to teach it to all +men in His Name, to keep inviolate the heirloom of revelation, +defending it against all error. <q>Going, therefore, teach ye all +nations</q> (Matt. xxviii. 19), was His command. <q>Go ye into +the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature; he +that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth +not shall be condemned</q> (Mark xvi. 15). <q>He that +heareth you, heareth Me, and he that despiseth you, despiseth +Me</q> (Luke x. 16). <q>Behold, I am with you all days, even to +the consummation of the world</q> (Matt. xxviii. 20). He gave +His divine aid to the Church, in order that she might <emph>infallibly</emph> +keep His doctrine to the very end of time. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the divine revelation and the Church approach all men +with the duty to believe: <q>he that believeth shall be saved,</q> +God gravely commands; <q>and if he will not hear the Church, let +him be to thee as the heathen and publican</q> (Matt. xviii. 17). +They lay their teachings before the human intellect, bidding it +retain them as indubitable truth, upon their infallible testimony, +yet only after convincing itself that God has really +spoken, and that this Church is the true one, which cannot err. +And only after having convinced itself of the credibility of the +proposed teaching is it obliged to believe. Hence, according to +the Christian mind, faith is the <emph>reasonable conviction of +the truth of what is proposed for belief, by reason of +an acknowledged infallible testimony</emph>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The Catholic dogma we find explained in the definition of the Vatican +Council, which had to expose so many errors that are liable in our days +to confuse the faithful in their notions of faith and Church. <q>This +<pb n='068'/><anchor id='Pg068'/> +faith,</q> says the Vatican Council (Sess. III, chap. 3), <q>which is the beginning +of human salvation, the Catholic Church teaches to be a supernatural +virtue, by which, through the inspiration and co-operation of the +grace of God, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not on account +of the intrinsic truth of it, perceived by the natural light of reason, +but on the authority of God who gives the revelation, who can neither +deceive nor be deceived.... Nevertheless, in order that the service of +our belief might be in accord with reason (<q>a reasonable service</q>) God +willed to unite to the internal helps of the Holy Ghost external proofs +of His revelation, to wit, external works divine, especially miracles and +prophecies, which, clearly demonstrating God's omnipotence and infinite +knowledge, are most certain signs of divine revelation and are suited to +the intelligence of all.</q> The Council adds expressly the canon: <q>If +any one say that divine revelation cannot be made credible by exterior +signs, and that men ought therefore to be moved to belief solely by their +interior experience or individual inspiration, let him be anathema.</q> +We have here stated the Catholic dogma as unanimously taught by all +Christian centuries, by all Fathers and theologians. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Hence, the act of faith by which I believe that the Son of +God became man, that I shall rise from the dead, is first of all +a <emph>judgment of the reason</emph>, not an act of the will, or a feeling +of the heart. It is, moreover, a <emph>certain</emph> rational judgment upon +weighty reasons, not, indeed, such which I draw from intellectual +knowledge, but those which rest upon the infallible +testimony of God. The act of faith agrees therefore with assent +to historic truth in that it is of the same kind of knowledge, but +upon the authority of infallible testimony. Just as I believe +that Alexander once marched victoriously through Asia, because +there is sure testimony to that effect, so I believe that I shall rise +from the dead, because God has revealed it. The difference +being that in the former case we have only human testimony, +whereas in the latter God Himself speaks. Thus, according to +Catholic teaching, faith and knowledge may be distinct from +each other, but in a sense quite different from that of the representatives +of modern, sentimental faith. The latter understand +knowledge, in this connection, to be any judgment of the reason +based upon evidence, and they deny that faith is such; but to +a Catholic, faith, too, is a <emph>judgment of the reason</emph>, and in this +sense true knowledge; only it is not knowledge in the more common +sense of a cognition derived from one's own mental activity +<emph>without</emph> the external means of authority. +</p> + +<p> +As we have heard from the Vatican Council, it is the recognized +<pb n='069'/><anchor id='Pg069'/> +fact of divine revelation which bestows upon the matter +of faith its certainty in reason. Hence the knowledge of +this fact must precede faith itself. But the knowledge must be +certain, not merely a belief, for it is the very presupposition of +belief, but a knowledge, derived from the intellect, which may +at any time be traced back to scientific proofs if there is the +requisite philosophical training. So long as man is not certain +that God has spoken, he cannot have faith according to the +Catholic view. One of the sentences condemned by <hi rend='italic'>Innocent +XI.</hi>, to say nothing of other ecclesiastical testimonies, is this: +<q>The assent of supernatural faith, useful for salvation, can +exist with merely probable information of the fact of revelation, +even with the fear that God has not spoken.</q> And very +recently there has been condemned also the proposition: <q>The +assent of faith ultimately rests upon a sum of probabilities</q> +(Decretum Lamentabile, July 3, 1907. Sent. 25). +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be our task here to show at length how the Christian +arrives at this certain knowledge. Our present purpose +is only to state the Catholic concept of faith. We have already +heard the Vatican Council refer to miracles and prophecies. +To most of the faithful the chief fact that offers them this +security is the wonderful phenomenon of the <emph>Catholic +Church</emph> itself, which proposes to them the doctrines of faith as +divine revelation. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Thus again the Vatican Council defines clearly: <q>To enable us to do +our duty in embracing the true faith and remaining in it steadfastly, +God has through His incarnate Son established the Church and set +plain marks upon His institution, in order that it may be recognized by +all as the guardian and interpreter of revelation. For only the Catholic +Church possesses all those arrangements, so various and wonderful, made +by God in order to demonstrate publicly the credibility of Christianity. +Indeed the Church of itself, because of its wonderful propagation, its +pre-eminent sanctity and inexhaustible fecundity in everything good, its +Catholic unity and invincible duration, is a grand permanent proof of +its credibility and irrefutable testimony in behalf of its divine mission. +Thus, like a 'standard unto the nations,' it invites those to come to it +who have not yet believed, and assures its children that the faith +they profess rests upon a most firm foundation.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The Catholic looks with pride upon his Church: she has stood all +the trials of history. He sees her endure, though within harassed by +heresies and endangered by various unworthiness and incapacity of her +priests, and attacked incessantly from without by irreconcilable enemies, +<pb n='070'/><anchor id='Pg070'/> +yet prevailing victoriously through the centuries, blessing, converting +nations and beloved by them; while by her side worldly kingdoms, +supported by armies and weapons, go down into the grave of human +instability. The most wonderful fact in the world's history, contrary +to all laws of natural, historical events,—here a higher hand is plainly +thrust into human history; it is the fulfilment of the divine promise: +<q>I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.</q> +<q>The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.</q> He sees the Saints, +who have lived in this Church and have become saints through her, +those superhuman heroes of virtue, who far surpass the laws of human +capacity. +</p> + +<p> +In the most widely different states of life in the Church he sees +virtue grow in the degree in which one submits to her guidance. He witnesses +the remarkable spectacle, that everything noble and good is attracted +by the Church, and their contrary repelled. He sees the miracles +which never cease in her midst. Finally he beholds her admirable unity +and vigorous faith; she alone holding firm to her teaching, not compromising +with any error; she alone holding fearlessly aloft the principle of +divine authority, and thus becoming a beacon to many who are seeking a +safe shelter from spiritual ruin. In addition we finally have that +harmony and grandeur of the truths of faith, and—perhaps not in the +last place—that calm and peace of mind, produced in the faithful soul +by a life led according to this faith, by prayer and the reception of +the Sacraments. This is a clear proof that where the Spirit of God +breathes there cannot be the seat of untruth. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +These are sufficient proofs to produce even in the uneducated, +and in children, true and reasonable certainty, provided they +have had sufficient instruction in religion. It must, however, +be emphasized that this conviction produced by faith need <emph>not +first be gained by scientific investigation</emph> of the motives +of faith, or by minute or extensive theological studies. A wrong +notion of human knowledge frequently leads to the opinion that +there is no true certainty at all unless it is the result of scientific +study—a presumption on which is based the claim of freedom +of science to disregard any conviction, be it ever so sacred, and +the claim that it is reserved to science alone to attain the sure +possession of the truth. Later on we shall dwell more at length +upon this important point. Let it suffice here to remark that +the intellect can attain real certainty even without scientific +research; most of our convictions, which we all hold unhesitatingly +as true, are of this kind. They constitute a belief +that is based upon the real knowledge of the reason, which +knowledge is not, however, so clear and distinct that it could +be demonstrated easily in scientific form. +</p> + +<pb n='071'/><anchor id='Pg071'/> + +<p> +The certainty of faith, therefore, is based upon the knowledge +that God Himself vouches for the truth of the teachings of +faith. This relieves the faithful from the necessity of obtaining +by his own reflection an insight into the intrinsic reasons of the +why and the wherefore of the proposed truth, and to examine in +each instance the correctness of the thing. He knows that +God has revealed it, that His infallible Church vouches for it; +hence it is credible and true; that suffices for him, just as trustworthy +evidence suffices for the historian concerning facts which +he himself has not observed. +</p> + +<p> +Let no one say that faith is a <emph>blind belief</emph> and blind obedience, +and that dogmatic Christianity, or, to use another +phrase, <q>the religion of the law, demands first of all obedience: +it is true it would like, besides that, an interior assent for its +thoughts and commandments, but where this is lacking the law +itself furnishes the ways and means to compensate the lack of +this internal assent, if only obedience is there</q> (<hi rend='italic'>A. Harnack</hi>, +Religioeser Glaube u. freie Forschung. Neue Freie Presse, June +7, 1908). Nor let any one say that free research has <q>at least +this advantage over dogma, that its claims can be proved, +which is not true of the other's claims</q> (<hi rend='italic'>J. H. van't Hoff</hi>, ibid., +Dec. 29, 1907). These are misrepresentations. +</p> + +<p> +There is no obedience to faith which is not <emph>internal assent +and conviction</emph>, and there is no clinging to dogmas which is +not based on motives of faith, or which could not at any time +be subjected to scientific investigation. If the term <q>blindness +of belief</q> were intended to express only that the believer holds +the revealed doctrine to be true, not because he has discovered its +truth by his own reasoning, but on the authority of God, then +we might suffer the misleading word. But it is utterly false in +the sense that the believer has no conviction at all. Even +though others have it not, the faithful Catholic, the believing +Christian, has it, and it is personal conviction. He has convinced +himself that God has spoken, and of the credibility and +hence the truth of the revealed doctrine, by his own reason, and +this is why he assents. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Still greater is the misrepresentation of the real motive of faith, +if it is held to be the opinion of the Pope or of Roman Prelates. <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi> +<pb n='072'/><anchor id='Pg072'/> +thus misstates the Catholic position: <q>Not every one can acquire +knowledge. But any one can believe. The enlightened leaders of the +Church, and the Church herself first of all, have knowledge, and by +dint of authority determine what is to be believed</q> (Ethik, 3d ed., 1903, +I, p. 342). According to the popular scientific propaganda of unbelief, +we have to deal in the Church merely with <q>ignorant monks, Asiatic +patriarchs, and similar dignitaries, some very superstitious, who, for instance, +assembled in the third century and decided <emph>by vote</emph> that the +Gospel is the word of God; we have to deal with men who have +proved their incapacity and incompetence</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Masaryk</hi>, Im Kampfe um +die Religion, 1904, pp. 22-23). +</p> + +<p> +Any one who shares such ideas about the supernaturalness of the +Catholic Church has, of course, forfeited his claim to understand Catholic +life and faith. The Catholic believes in his Church, not on any +account of Asiatic patriarchs and superstitious dignitaries, but because +she is led by the Holy Ghost, and the Pope must believe the +same as the humblest of the faithful: neither the Pope himself relies +upon his own judgment, nor does the Catholic who trusts in the word +of the Pope. +</p> + +<p> +We add a few remarks which may further illustrate the action of +faith. +</p> + +<p> +The knowledge of the fact of revelation, hence of the credibility of +the truths revealed, is certain, as shown above. Nevertheless, <emph>it does +not compel</emph> reason to assent. Under ordinary circumstances it would +be impossible to think of one's own existence, of the elementary laws of +mathematics, without being constrained by the evidence to give direct +internal assent. But insight into the truth of a thing is not always of +this high degree of clearness. In such cases it is an empirical law of +the mind that reason discerns of itself the <emph>logical</emph> necessity, that is, if +it desires to proceed according to the merits of the case, without, however, +acting under <emph>physical</emph> constraint. There remains then the determination, +the command of the will. This is generally true of many judgments +about natural things, but especially true of belief. The knowledge +of the fact of revelation is true and certain, though it might be still +clearer. The truths offered by divine revelation are too deep for us to +comprehend them fully; they imply questions and difficulties for us to +ponder. We feel the physical possibility of pondering these difficulties, +although we see at the same time that the difficulty is exploded by +the certainty of the fact of revelation; but we remain <emph>free</emph> in giving our +assent. +</p> + +<p> +Herein lies the possibility of <emph>meritorious</emph> faith, the possibility of the +creature rendering to God the free tribute of his free submission. At +the same time it opens the possibility of turning voluntarily to doubts, +and of submitting to them more and more, till the mind becomes clouded +and ensnared by error. Thus, since faith depends on free will, the will +is strictly commanded to impel the intellect to assent and cling to faith +and to put aside doubts. God has revealed the truths of faith that they +may be firmly believed. +</p> + +<p> +Hence faith is a product of the will also, and may become part and +parcel of the sentimental life. Firmly believed, revealed truths engender +in man love and gratitude, fear and hope. And being beautiful and comforting, +<pb n='073'/><anchor id='Pg073'/> +they are embraced fervently by the heart, and become objects +of desire, sources of comfort and happiness. Nevertheless they are in +themselves, and remain, rational judgments, based upon insight and +knowledge; just as the fond recollections of home are and remain acts +of cognition, though our affections are twined round those reminiscences +like wreaths of evergreen. +</p> + +<p> +What has just been said illustrates also another point,—the <emph>relation +of faith to grace</emph>. The Vatican Council says: <q>Faith is a supernatural +virtue by which, through the inspiration and co-operation of +the grace of God, we believe to be true what He has revealed.</q> Faith +is called a gift of God, a work of grace. But this must not mislead us +to think that it is a mystical process, taking place in the human mind, +indeed, but not moving along the natural course of human cognition, +but along quite a different course: perhaps an immediate mystical grasp +of the revealed truth, while natural intelligence stands aside, not understanding +it. This would be returning to our starting point,—making +faith anything but a judgment of the reason. It is a common +doctrine of theology that the process of faith differs nothing in kind +from the natural process of human intellect in its apprehension of the +truth. It is belief on grounds recognized as sufficient motives for +assent. +</p> + +<p> +What then does grace do? Two things. First, it elevates the act +of the soul in the process of believing to a higher sphere. Just as +sanctifying grace elevates the soul itself to a supernatural sphere, permitting +it to partake of the nature of God, so does the grace of faith +raise the acts of the soul to the supernatural order. The <emph>kind</emph> of cognition, +however, remains the same: just as a ring does not alter its +form by being golden instead of silver. +</p> + +<p> +In the second place, grace is <emph>assistance</emph>: it enlightens the intellect +that it may be able to see more clearly, not giving to motives of faith +an importance which they have not of themselves, but helping the intellect +to see them as they are; removing the troubles and dangers of +doubt which beset the mind, so that it may retain that calmness which +generally accompanies the possession of the truth. The pledge of this +assistance is given the Christian at baptism and with each increase of +sanctifying grace. But the actual effect of grace depends on many conditions. +If one omits prayer and neglects religious duties, deafens one's +ear to the word of God, incurs knowingly unnecessary dangers to faith, +forsakes the path of virtue, then grace may withdraw to a considerable +extent; doubts become stronger, intellectual darkness and confusion +increase, and man goes on apace towards infidelity. +</p> + +<p> +This is the Catholic doctrine concerning faith. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Faith and Reason.</head> + +<p> +But to return to our question: In what relation do faith and +the duty to believe stand to freedom of research? We said that +freedom of research consists in exemption from all unjust external +restraint, that is, from those external hindrances to the +<pb n='074'/><anchor id='Pg074'/> +action of the human intellect which prevent it from attaining +its natural end. Now what is this natural end? The answer +will make clear what restraint and laws must be respected by +the human mind, and which may be rightly rejected. +</p> + +<p> +On the coat-of-arms of Harvard University is written the +beautiful word <q>Truth.</q> Upon the human mind, too, is inscribed +the word <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Veritati</foreign>—<emph>for the truth</emph>. The human +mind exists for the sake of truth; for the truth it reasons and +searches; it is its natural object, as sound is the object of the +human ear, and light and colour the object of the eye. And +truth attracts the mind strongly. The child wants the truth, and +tries to get it by its many questions; the historian wants the +truth, and tries to get it by his incessant searching and collecting. +<q>I can hardly resist my craving,</q> <hi rend='italic'>William von Humboldt</hi> +confesses, <q>to see and know and examine as much as possible: +after all, man seems to be here only for the purpose of +appropriating to himself, making his own property, the property +of his intellect, all that surrounds him—and life is short. +When I depart this life I should like to leave behind me as little +as possible unexperienced by me</q> (apud <hi rend='italic'>O. Willmann</hi>, Didaktik +als Bildungslehre, 3d ed., II, 1903, p. 7). The great physicist, +<hi rend='italic'>W. Thomson</hi>, a few years ago closed a life of eighty-three years—he +died in December, 1907—devoted to the last to unabated +search for the truth. It is true not all are called to labour in +this field like <hi rend='italic'>W. Thomson</hi>. But every one who has capability +may and should help to promote the noble work. Only they +are excluded who do not want to look for the truth, or who are +even ready, for external considerations, to pass off falsehood for +the truth, unproved for established results. <q>I know of nothing,</q> +says the ancient sage, <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, <q>that is more worthy of the +human mind than truth</q> (Rep. VI, p. 483 c.). And so +the poet <hi rend='italic'>Pindar</hi> sings: <q>Queen Truth, the mother of sublime +Virtue.</q> +</p> + +<p> +If this is the aim of the human mind and its science, there is +but one freedom of research, the <emph>freedom for the truth</emph>, the +right not to be hampered in searching for the truth, not to be +forced to hold as true what has not been previously vouched for +to the intellect as true; in a word, the freedom to wear but one +<pb n='075'/><anchor id='Pg075'/> +chain, the golden chain of the truth. Hence, if the scientist +should be compelled by party interest, or public opinion, to pursue +a course in science which he cannot acknowledge as the right +one; if the younger scientist should feel constrained to conform +the results of his research to the pleasure of his older colleagues +or of men of name, against his own better judgment, then he +would be deprived of his rightful freedom of searching for the +truth, and of deciding for himself when he has found it. But +there is one sort of freedom the scientist should never claim—<emph>freedom +against the truth</emph>, freedom to ignore the truth, to +emancipate himself from the truth. He is bound to accept every +truth, sufficiently proved, even religious dogmas, miracles too, +provided they are authenticated. Not freedom, but truth, is +the purpose of research: emancipation from the truth is degeneration +of the intellect, destruction of science. +</p> + +<p> +What, then, does the duty to believe require of the faithful +Christian? He is required, first of all, to assure himself of the +certain credibility of those truths which he is required to believe, +and here authentic proofs are offered him. On his perception of +the credibility of these truths, he ought to assent to and accept +God's testimony. Hence there should be no coercion to believe +without interior conviction, no obstacle put in the way of recognizing +the truth. <emph>Where, then, is here any opposition to +the lawful freedom of research</emph>, to the right of unimpeded +search for the truth? How is reason hindered in its search for +the truth when truth is offered it by an infallible authority? +We have here no opposition to the laws of reason, but due honour +to its sacred rights; no bondage, but elevation and enrichment, +completion and crowning of its thought, for the highest truth +has been communicated to the reason that it may be of one +mind with that Infinite Wisdom which has shaped reason for +the truth, and from which it obtains its light as the planet from +the sun around which it revolves. +</p> + +<p> +Therefore, it cannot be said that <q>the Catholic resolves to +believe as true what the Church teaches in the Apostles' Creed, +but were he offered anything else as Church doctrine he would +accept it as well. Hence these doctrines do not express his own +personal opinions, they are something extraneous to him.</q> +<pb n='076'/><anchor id='Pg076'/> +(<hi rend='italic'>W. Herrmann</hi>, Roemische u. evangelische Sittlichkeit, 3d ed., +1903, p. 3). No, what the Catholic, what any true Christian, +believes by faith, that is his innermost conviction, as it +is the firm conviction of the historian that what he has drawn +from reliable sources is true.—But what if the contrary were +offered him? Well, this assumption is absurd; and why? Because +God and His Church are infallible, and an infallible +authority cannot speak the truth and its contrary at the same +time. Much less than a reliable historical witness can testify +to the truth and its contrary at the same time. +</p> + +<p> +This same conviction gives to the faithful Christian the firm +assurance that no certain result of human research will ever +come in conflict with his faith, just as the mathematician does +not fear that his principle will ever be contradicted by any +further work. Truth can never contradict truth. <q>Thus we +believe and thus we teach and herein lies our salvation.</q> It +is the very old conviction of the faithful Christian <q>that philosophy, +that is, the study of wisdom, and religion are not different +things.</q> <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Non aliam esse philosophiam, i.e., sapientiae +studium et aliam religionem</foreign> (<hi rend='italic'>Augustinus</hi>, De Vera Religione, +5). It is precisely this that enables the believing scientist +to devote himself with great freedom and impartiality to +research in every field, and to acknowledge any certified result +without fear of ever having to stop before a definite conclusion. +</p> + +<p> +Such is the <emph>peace between faith and science</emph> according +to Christian principles. They are not torn apart, but join hands +peacefully, like truth with truth, like two certain convictions, +only gained in different ways. Similar is the peace and harmony +between the results of various sciences, as physics and +astronomy, geology and biology, which results, though arrived +at by different methods, are still not opposed to each other, +because they are both true. +</p> + +<p> +The authority of faith, however, must be <emph>infallible</emph>; the +authority of a scientist, a school or the state, can never approach +us with an absolute obligation to believe it, because it cannot +vouch for the truth. To the Catholic his Church proves itself +infallible; hence everything is here logically consequent. Protestant +Church authorities have not infallibility, nor do they +<pb n='077'/><anchor id='Pg077'/> +claim it. Hence their precepts are seen more and more opposed. +Hence to the Protestant the firm attachment of the +Catholic to his Church must ever remain unintelligible, and +it is regrettable that Catholics take instruction from Protestants +about their relation to their Church.<note place='foot'><p>The difference between the Protestant and the Catholic manner of +reasoning is stated by the convert, Prof. <hi rend='italic'>A. von Ruville</hi>, as follows: +</p> +<p> +<q>My mind had harboured up to now the characteristically Protestant +thought that I, from my superior mental standpoint, was going to probe +the Catholic Church, that I was going to pass an infallible judgment +on her truth or untruth, and this in spite of my being ready to acknowledge +the truth in her. But now I became more and more conscious of +the fact that it was the Church who had a right to pass judgment on me, +that I had to bow to her opinion, that she immeasurably surpassed +me in wisdom. Many details, which I was inclined to criticize, demonstrated +this to me, for in every instance I recognized that it was my +understanding that was at fault, and that what appeared to me as an +imperfection was rooted in the deepest truth. In this way I was gradually +brought to the real Catholic standpoint, to accept the doctrines +immediately as Truth, because they proceeded from the Church, and +then to endeavour to understand them thoroughly, and to reap from +them the fullest possible harvest of Truth. Formerly, with regard to +Protestant doctrines, I always retained my independence and the sovereignty +of my judgment. Why should I not have had my own opinion, +when every denomination and every theologian had an individual +opinion? How different with the Catholic Church. Before her sublime, +never varying wisdom, as it is proclaimed by every simple priest, I +bowed my knees in humility. Compared to her experience of two thousand +years my ephemeral knowledge was a mere nothing</q> (Back to +Holy Church, by Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Albert von Ruville</hi>, pp. 30, 31).</p></note> +</p> + +<p> +We must go a step further. If there is a divine revelation +or an infallible Church—we speak only hypothetically—then +no man and <emph>no scientific research can claim the right</emph> +to contradict this revelation and Church. Scientific research +is not the hypostatized activity of a superhuman genius, of a god-like +intelligence. No, it is the activity of a human intellect, and +the latter is subject to God and truth everywhere. There can be +no freedom to oppose the truth; no privilege not to be bound to +the truth but rather to have the right to construct one's views +autonomously. +</p> + +<p> +But here lies the deeper reason why to-day thousands to whom +<hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> <emph>autonomism in thought</emph> has become the nerve of their +intellectual life, will have nothing to do with guidance by +<pb n='078'/><anchor id='Pg078'/> +revelation and Church. They can no longer understand that +their reason should accept the truth from an external authority, +not, indeed, because they would not find the truth, but because +they would lose their independence. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It was <hi rend='italic'>Sabatier</hi> who maintained that <q>an external authority, no matter +how great one may think it to be, does not suffice to arouse in us +any sense of obligation.</q> And <hi rend='italic'>Th. Lipps</hi> says on this further: <q>If +obedience is taken in its narrower sense, that is, of determination by the +will of another, then no obedience is moral.</q> <q>In brief, obedience is +immoral—not as a fact but as a feeling, betokening an unfree, slavish +mind</q> (Die ethiseben Grundfragen, 2d ed., 1905, p. 119). And <hi rend='italic'>W. +Herrmann</hi> assures us. <q>We would deem it a sin if we dared treat a +proposition as true of which the ideas are not our own. If we should +find such a proposition in the Bible, then we may perhaps resolve to +wait and see whether its truth cannot be brought home to us after we +have obtained a clearer and stronger insight of ourselves. But from +the resolution to take that proposition as true without more ado, we +could not promise ourselves anything beneficial.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is for the sovereign subject himself to decide whether the +ideas offered are compatible with the rest of his notions. A +truth offered from without is acceptable to the subject only +when, and because, he can produce of himself at the same time +what is offered; but he cannot accept the obligation of <emph>submitting</emph> +to that truth in obedience to faith. <q>There is no infallible +teaching authority on earth, nor can there be any. Philosophy +and science would have to contradict themselves to acknowledge +it,</q> says another champion of <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> freedom (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, Philosophia +militans, 2d ed., p. 52). Hence the reason why there +cannot be any infallible authority is, not because it does not +offer the truth, but because the human intellect must not be +chained down. +</p> + +<p> +Now, this is no longer true freedom, but rebellion against +the sacred right that truth has over the intellect. It is rebellion +against the supreme authority of God, who can oblige man to +embrace His revelation with that reason which He Himself has +bestowed upon man. It is a misconception of the human mind, +for it is by no means the source of truth and absolute knowledge, +but weak and in need of supplement. Many truths it cannot by +itself find at all, while in the quest for others it needs safe +guidance lest it lose its way. If it refuses to be supplemented +<pb n='079'/><anchor id='Pg079'/> +and guided from above, it demands the freedom of the weak +vine allowed to break loose from the needed support of the tree, +the freedom of the planet allowed to deviate from its orbit +to be hopelessly wrecked in the universe. The barrenness and +disintegration in the ideal life of our own unchristian age, +are clear testimony that freedom is not only lawlessness but +a sin against one's own nature. +</p> + +<p> +Or, do they seek to save themselves by asserting that a divine +revelation and the founding of an infallible Church are <emph>impossible</emph>? +Very well, then, let them prove it. On this the +question hinges. If they can prove it to us, that very moment +we shall cease to be faithful Catholics, and Christianity will have +been the most stupendous lie in history. But if the reverse is +the case, then all declamations in the name of free research fall +to the ground. +</p> + +<p> +This impossibility, however, could only be proved by the aid +of a presumption. This presumption is <emph>atheism</emph>, which denies +the existence of a personal God, or at least doubts it. If it +is admitted that there is a personal God, then it is self-evident +that He can give a revelation, and found an infallible Church, +and can oblige all to believe. But herewith collapses also the +liberal principle that, in reasoning, one may reject an external +authority. Hence the principle of liberal freedom in science +can only then be taken seriously, when one advances to atheism. +Then, of course, they will say with <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>: God is dead; +long live the transcendental man! +</p> + +<p> +Our assertions are proved by experience. At the end of the +eighteenth century the enlightenment began by excluding all revelation; +but it was desired to retain the rational truth of God's +existence. Since then, liberal science has been aiming at atheism +in philosophy, whether open or masked. And if we follow up +the career of men who have left their faith, we shall soon find +that if they do not seek peace in the sheltering harbour of +thoughtlessness, they have reached the terminal station of atheism. +There is no stopping on this incline. +</p> + +<p> +Since it is the express fundamental principle of the liberal +freedom of research, that science is not bound to any external +authority, it is evident that it is nothing else but the refusal +<pb n='080'/><anchor id='Pg080'/> +to submit to God's authority, hence, also, to submit to truth +if it appears as revelation. For, either it is admitted that +if there is a divine revelation, we have to give it our assent—and +in this event liberal freedom of science would have to be +abandoned,—or this liberal freedom is adopted in real earnest—then +it must be admitted that it is tantamount to <emph>radical +apostasy and defection from the truth</emph>. If a man wishes +to be a faithful Christian and at the same time to uphold the +liberal freedom of science, then he has never made clear to +himself what he wishes. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Ecce ancilla Domini.</foreign> Thus spoke the Mother of the Lord, +when she heard the message that she was to receive the +Word of the eternal Father in her bosom. This word of +humility and submission was the condition under which she +could receive in herself the eternal Wisdom of the Father. +</p> + +<p> +Behold, the Handmaid of the Lord! This word of humility +and submission to God must also be spoken by the creature's +intelligence, if it desires by faith to share in God's truth. Without +humility of mind a faithful attachment to God is impossible; +pride and arrogance lead to desertion of God, faith, and truth. +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Multum errant, quoniam superbi sunt</foreign>, says <hi rend='italic'>Augustine</hi> of +the erring companions of his youth. Only if there is humility +does God's wisdom cross the threshold of the creature's mind, +only if there is humility can it be said of man: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Et verbum +caro factum est et habitat in nobis, plenum gratiae et veritatis</foreign>. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='081'/><anchor id='Pg081'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter II. The Authority Of Faith And The Free +Exercise Of Research.</head> + +<div> +<head>Preliminary Remarks.</head> + +<p> +We must not stop at what we have just said in general +about the relation between the freedom of research and +the obligation to believe. We must go further into detail, in +order to give a more exact explanation of how and where the +authority of faith clashes with research and restrains it. Is it +true that the believing scientist cannot move freely in his research, +that there are barriers on all sides which he may not +overstep? Is it true that the Church may prescribe for the Catholic +scientist what he is allowed to defend and approve, what +he ought to refute and reprove, suppress or advocate, so that +his eyes must ever be turned towards Rome, to inquire and +ascertain what might there be approved? And what a chain of +proscriptions of free thinking is attached to the name of Rome! +Index, Syllabus, <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>—link after link is added to this chain +of miserable slavery! +</p> + +<p> +We shall say something more about this chain later on. First +we must consider the principal question: Where and how do +faith and science come in contact? And what we are going to +say we shall condense into four points. Thus freedom of science +will be more precisely defined; it will be shown what freedom +revelation, and especially the guardian of revelation, the +Church, offers to science: there can be no doubt that its natural +freedom of exercise must be left to science intact. +</p> + +<p> +We shall deal in the first place with the <emph>profane sciences</emph>, +and, at least for the present, leave aside the discussion of +theology, since it is clear that theology, being the science of +faith, must assume a peculiar position in regard to the authority +<pb n='082'/><anchor id='Pg082'/> +of faith: theology, moreover, is a special mark for attack; +accordingly we shall deal with it particularly later on. However, +the principles to be cited, being of a general nature, refer +also to the science of faith, and for this reason we shall have +occasion to refer to them. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>1. Authority of Faith and Private Authority.</head> + +<p> +We often meet with the most inconceivable notions. We are +told quite seriously that the Church teaches, and that the Catholic +has therefore to believe, that the earth is a flat disc surrounded +by the sea, as the ancients believed; above it is a vault, below it +hell-fire; that the earth stands still and the sun and stars revolve +about it, just as <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi> of Egypt taught; that God created the +whole world just as it is now in exactly six days of twenty-four +hours each; that He made the sun and moon, just as they are +now illuminating the skies; that the strata, just as they now look +when bared by the geologist's hammer, even the coal-fields and +petrified saurians and fossils—all were made, just as they now +are, well nigh six thousand years ago. The Scriptures teach this, +the Fathers of old and the theologians believe this: and that +is where the Catholic must get his science. And then they are +astonished, and consider dogma retreating before science, when +they see other notions prevailing, when they see Catholic scientists +defend without prejudice the evolution of the solar system, +and even the system of the whole universe, from some primitive +matter, or assume an organic evolution, as far as science supports +it (cf. <hi rend='italic'>Braun</hi>, Ueber Kosmologie u. Standpunkt christlich. +Wiss., 2d ed., 1906, etc.). They would be still more astonished +perhaps to learn that similar ideas had long ago been proposed +by <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas</hi> (cf. Summa c. G. l. 3, c. 77; +<hi rend='italic'>Knabenbauer</hi>, in Stimmen a. M. Laach xiii, 75 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +A distinction must be made between the teaching of the +Church and the private views of individuals, schools, or periods. +Only the teaching of the Church is the obligatory standard of +Christian and Catholic thought, not the opinion of individuals. +Hence not everything that Catholic savants have held to be +true belongs to the teaching of the Church. Only when theologians +unanimously declare something to be contained in the +<pb n='083'/><anchor id='Pg083'/> +deposit of revealed truth, or the teaching of the Church,—only +then is their teaching authoritative; not because it is the +teaching of theologians, but because it is contained in revelation +or the teaching of the Church. Else the maxim holds +good: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Tantum valet auctoritas, quantum argumenta</foreign>. Nor +is all that which a former age found in Holy Scripture, therefore +to be believed as revealed truth, to the exclusion of all +other interpretations. +</p> + +<p> +The foregoing may be elucidated by the examples given above. +When Holy Writ describes in figurative language and Oriental, +demonstrative style, how God created the heaven and earth, the +sun and moon, the sea and its contents, it means to teach us +religious truths: that God is the First Cause of everything, and +hence that the sun and moon, for instance, are not uncreated +deities, as the Egyptian believed them to be. The narrative need +not be taken in a literal sense, as if God immediately formed +everything in the exact condition as it now appears to us; it +may be interpreted in the sense that God let the present condition +of things gradually grow out of the forces and materials +and plan of nature He created, the result of a lengthy evolution. +When our Lord tells us in the gospel that His Father in heaven +feeds the birds of the air and clothes the grass of the field, we +know that this is to be understood as a mediate action of God, +which He exercises through the instinct of animals and through +natural forces which He created for the purpose. Now when former +ages, reading the narrative of Genesis, generally understood +an immediate creation of the world, because the knowledge of nature +at the time did not admit of any other interpretation, it is by +no means necessary to conclude from it that every other interpretation +must be rejected as against the Bible, or that the Church +herself has prescribed this literal interpretation as the only +correct one. As is known, <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>, the greatest Father +of the Church, had another very liberal explanation of the Genesis +narrative, and the Church has never censured him. (He +taught that the whole world had been created at one time, and +that the six days of the Mosaic narrative were the logical divisions +of an account of the various orders of creatures.) And +now the interpretations vary greatly. The passages in Scripture, +<pb n='084'/><anchor id='Pg084'/> +in which, according to popular modes of expression, the sun is +said to rise and set and revolve about the earth, the latter +standing in the centre of the world—these, too, were interpreted +literally in the days of the Fathers: there was no cause +for interpreting them otherwise; but it was only due to defective +knowledge of nature at the time. These temporary errors +remained till corrected by research in the field of the natural +sciences: had the discoveries been made sooner, the errors, too, +would have disappeared sooner. +</p> + +<p> +The Church knows, and the holy Fathers knew, that it is not +the purpose of Holy Writ to teach profane sciences, but to instruct +in faith and morals; if it speaks of other matters, it is +but occasionally, and then in the idiom of common life, which +is not the same as the scientific language of the specialist. +Indeed, the Bible does not intend to give scientific instruction in +such matters, nor could it have done so at a time when men were +not ripe for such enlightenment. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Thus <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> insists that the Spirit of God who spoke through +the authors of Scripture did not intend to instruct men in matters which +do not serve for salvation, and hence he objects to the Scriptures being +taken literally in regard to such matters, because the Bible adapts itself +to man's manner of speech: a distinction is to be made between letter +and sense (<q>Multi multum disputant de iis rebus, quae majore prudentia +nostri auctores omiserunt, ad beatam vitam non profuturas discentibus +... Breviter dicendum est, ... Spiritum Dei, qui per ipsos +loquebatur, noluisse ita docere homines nulli saluti profuturas,</q> De +Gen. ad lit., II, 9, n. 20. Cf. De Gen. contra Manich. 1, 5, n. 3; 11, n. 17). +He further cautions Bible students against putting their own interpretation +upon obscure passages and then claiming it to be dogma, because +one may easily go astray and thus make the Scriptures appear ridiculous. +<q>In rebus obscuris atque a nostris oculis remotissimis, si qua +inde scripta etiam divina legerimus, quae possint salva fide, qua imbuimur, +alias atque alias parere sententias, in nullam earum nos praecipiti +affirmatione proiciamus, ut si forte, diligentius discussa veritas +eam recte labefactaverit, corruamus, non pro sententia divinarum +scripturarum sed pro nosctra ita dimicantes, ut eam velimus scripturarum +esse, quae nostra est</q> (De genesi ad lit. I, 18 n. 37). <q>Plerumque +accidit, ut aliquid de terra, de coelo, de ceteris mundi huius elementis +... etiam non christianus ita noverit, ut certissima ratione et +experientia teneat. Turpe est autem nimis et perniciosum ac maxime +cavendum, ut christianus de his rebus quasi secundum christianas +literas loquentem ita delirare quilibet infidelis audiat, ut, quemadmodum +dicitur, toto coelo errare conspiciens, risum tenere vix possit</q> (Ibid. I, +19 n. 39). Cf. also I, 21. <hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas of Aquin</hi> also expresses himself +<pb n='085'/><anchor id='Pg085'/> +in this sense: <q>Multum autem nocet, talia, quae ad pietatis doctrinam +non spectant, vel asserere vel negare, quasi pertinentia ad sacram doctrinam +... Unde mihi videtur tutius esse, ut haec, quae philosophi +communius senserunt et nostrae fidei non repugnant, neque sic esse asserenda +ut dogmata fidei, licet aliquando sub nomine philosophorum introducantur, +neque sic esse neganda tamquam fidei contraria, ne sapientibus +huius mundi contemnendi doctrinam fidei occasio praebeatur</q> +(Opusc. X. ad Jo. Vercel. Proem.). +</p> + +<p> +The doctrine of the <emph>Church</emph> concurs with this, as laid down in +numerous documents, many of them quoting the above-mentioned words +of <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>. It also insists that the interpretation of the Fathers +be only taken as a standard of the Church's explanation of the meaning +of Scripture when they are unanimous on the meaning of a passage +relating to faith and morals; but not to other things (cf. Encycl. +Providentissimus, Denz. 10 ed., n. 1947, 1944; Conc. Trid., sess. IV., +Conc. Vat. sess. III., c. 2, Denz. nn. 786, 1788). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Now if one simply opens Holy Scripture, takes up some passage +at random, explains it in its most literal sense, and then +insists that this is the evident meaning, and goes on to assert +with the same insistence that this is the interpretation of the +Church, and a part of the faith of Catholics in regard to the +natural sciences, then of course it is very easy to make out +contradictions between faith and science: but such efforts cannot +claim to be scientific. It is not necessary to know theology +and the principles of Catholic exegesis; but it is not proper +that those who are ignorant of these matters pass judgment on +them, not even in the name of objective research. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Hence we may easily see what we should think of a writer who +asserts that the examination of the Christian-Catholic idea of the +world leads to the following results: <q>The Books of Moses, inspired by +divine revelation, are the golden key to the understanding of the whole +history of creation. Other Scriptural passages of the Old and New +Testaments, the writings of the Fathers, etc., are to be considered as +supplementary to these. According to these authorities the earth is +a flat disc, surrounded by the sea. Above it arches the firmament +of heaven, with its great lights for day and night. Below it are +purgatory and hell. All this is not the gradual outgrowth of lengthy +evolution, but was created by God out of nothing in a few days, +about six thousand years ago, of which four thousand are reckoned +before Christ and two thousand after Christ. Although modern science +has long since established that the Biblical narrative is of no worth, +nothing but an imperfect reproduction of older myths, the Catholic +Church continues to teach it literally to this very day, spreading it +broadcast by thousands and thousands of catechisms, and insisting on +it being learned as a part of religious instruction in all schools, and +<pb n='086'/><anchor id='Pg086'/> +to be accepted as the revealed truth</q> (<hi rend='italic'>L. Wahrmund</hi>, Katholische +Weltanschauung und freie Wissenschaft, 1908, p. 14. The scientific +value of this work has been considered by <hi rend='italic'>L. Fonck</hi>, Katholische +Weltansch). +</p> + +<p> +<q>Clericalism,</q> we are told, <q>stands on a rigidly fixed view of the +world, corresponding in part to the childhood of mankind, to the dawning +of civilization.... Philosophy, built upon the results of progress, +since it is unceasingly forcing its way ahead, cannot remain in accord +with the notions belonging to a remote past, partly to Babylonian and +Egyptian civilization, partly to the thought of nomadic times.</q> It is +then pointed out how this view of the world on which clericalism, that is, +the Catholic Church, is based, has already been overthrown in many instances. +<q>The geocentric position, the doctrine of our earth being the +centre and man the ultimate aim of the universe, must needs be abandoned +by the world of scientists, in view of the new system of Copernicus; +the doctrine also of the earth being a disc must be abandoned in +consequence of the voyage of Columbus, and subsequent discoveries, +which make it certain that the earth is a globe</q> (Prof. <hi rend='italic'>K. Menger</hi>, Die +Eroberung der Universitaeten. Neue Freie Presse, Nov. 24, 1907). It +is surprising what little knowledge suffices to warrant writing about +theological matters in the name of <q>objective research.</q> +</p> + +<p> +These passages, in regard to their scientific contents and manner, +recall vividly an American work that appeared some time ago, and +reached many editions. It is entitled, <q>A History of the Conflict Between +Religion and Science,</q> by <hi rend='italic'>J. W. Draper</hi>. The book was answered by +a competent authority, <hi rend='italic'>De Smedt</hi>, S. J., <q>L'Eglise et la Science,</q> 1877. +</p> + +<p> +It seems <hi rend='italic'>Draper's</hi> arguments have since become a pattern for many. +He, too, maintains that Holy Writ has always been declared by the +Church and the Fathers to be a source of profane science. This, he states, +is true especially of <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>. We read: <q>The book of Genesis ... +also in a philosophical point of view became the grand authority of +Patristic science. Astronomy, geology, geography, anthropology, chronology, +and indeed all the various departments of human knowledge, were +made to conform to it.... The doctrines of <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> have had the +effect of thus placing theology in antagonism with science....</q> <q>No +one did more than this Father to bring science and religion into antagonism; +it was mainly he who diverted the Bible from its true office—a +guide to purity of life—and placed it in the perilous position of being +the arbiter of human knowledge....</q> <q>What, then, is that sacred, that +revealed science, declared by the Fathers to be the sum of all knowledge?... +As to the earth, it affirmed that it is a flat surface, over +which the sky is spread like a dome. In this the sun and moon and stars +move, so that they may give light by day and by night to man.... +Above the sky or firmament is heaven; in the dark and fiery space beneath +the earth is hell....</q> (pp. 57-63). +</p> + +<p> +By reading again what we said above, especially the urgent admonitions +of <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> not to look upon the Scriptures as a text-book of +profane science, one will be able to appreciate the scientific quality of +the book in question. +</p> + +<p> +The fancy of this writer has distorted Christianity and the Church +into a monster that has nothing more important to do than to tread +<pb n='087'/><anchor id='Pg087'/> +down and crush science and civilization. A few examples will suffice to +show how he proves the <emph>contradictions between faith and science</emph>. +The Christian religion teaches that man is subject to death as +a penalty for original sin: prior to that sin death had no power over +Adam and Eve. It is claimed that this is a contradiction of science. +But how? Long before Adam, thousands of animals and plants had +died, the author asserts. <q>The doctrine declared to be orthodox by +ecclesiastical authority is overthrown by the unquestionable discoveries +of modern science. Long before a human being had appeared on earth +millions of individuals, nay, more, thousands of species and even genera +had died</q> (p. 57). The author has completely missed the point. The +matter in question is not the death of animals and plants, but the death +of man. The infallibility of the Pope is refuted by the fact that he +failed to foresee the result of the war between France and Germany. +<q>Notwithstanding his infallibility, which implies omniscience, His Holiness +did not foresee the issue of the Franco-Prussian war</q> (p. 352, also +p. 362). +</p> + +<p> +How high his historical statements are to be rated is shown by the +assertion that <hi rend='italic'>Cyril of Alexandria</hi> had much to do with the introduction +of the worship of the Virgin Mary (p. 55); that auricular confession +was introduced by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 (p. 208). +He asks when the idea originated that the Pentateuch was written by +Moses under divine inspiration, and he finds that <q>not until after the +second century [of the Christian era] was there any such extravagant +demand on human credulity</q> (p. 220). It would seem incredible that +any one could write such stuff. +</p> + +<p> +The author says in his preface: <q>I had also devoted much attention +to the experimental investigation of natural phenomena, and had published +many well-known memoirs on such subjects. And perhaps no +one can give himself to these pursuits, and spend a large part of his +life in the public teaching of science, without partaking of that love of +impartiality and truth which philosophy incites</q> (VIII-IX). We +do not care to argue with the author about his experience in experimental +research, nor about his love for the truth, but he himself has +shown superabundantly that they have not sufficed to keep him clear +from scientific shallowness and the grossest blunders. Nevertheless, it +seems that his scientific ability obtained for him in the consideration of +many the weight of an authority. <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, in his <q>Weltraetsel,</q> refers +repeatedly to the book, and recommends <q>its truthful statements and +excellent discussion</q> to his readers (Weltraetsel, 17. Kap., Wissenschaft +u. Christentum). +</p> + +<p> +Such is the fashion in which contradictions between faith and science, +and the Church's hostility towards scientific research, are proved. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The result is that we must distinguish clearly between +dogmas of faith and private opinions or interpretations. Of +course it may frequently happen, and has happened, that the +Christian savant is too timorous, and looks askance at the discoveries +of science, and even thinks he ought to resist them, +<pb n='088'/><anchor id='Pg088'/> +because he is afraid that religious truth might be opposed by +them. Nor can it be said that this timidity is altogether without +excuse, for there was hardly one scientific discovery of the +nineteenth century that was not immediately grasped and exploited +by eager enemies of the Christian religion. Too often +has science been made the menial of infidelity, and the assertion +has been untiringly repeated that science and faith +cannot agree. No wonder, then, that timid souls become +suspicious, that they are prone to resist the whole theory of +evolution in a lump, instead of trying to distinguish between +what is of scientific value in it, and what is misused for the purpose +of denying creation. +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, such narrow-mindedness is strongly to be censured. +It has often caused the reproach, that Catholics lack +the freedom to admit scientific discoveries. They forget the +wise admonition of the prince of mediæval theologians, that it +were advisable, in regard to scientific views which have nothing +to do with religion, neither to set them down as truths of faith, +nor either to reject them as contrary to faith lest occasion +be given to think contemptuously of the faith. As long as +men are and men think, narrow-mindedness will never be lacking. +Hence if the believing scientist wants to know whether he +is running counter to faith in any particular, he has to ascertain +from theological text-books what the Church declares to +belong to faith, what explanation of Holy Scripture is unconditionally +binding, and not what is the individual opinion of +theologians, much less what some pious nurse is telling the +little ones. +</p> + +<p> +This is the first rule concerning the relation between faith and +science: it states what the scientist is <emph>not</emph> tied down to. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>2. Science Retains its Method of Research.</head> + +<p> +But when and how may the scientist be restricted? Here we +come to the second point: the directions which faith may give +to the profane sciences are in themselves not of a positive but +of a <emph>negative kind</emph>; revelation and Church cannot tell the +scientist what he is to assert or defend in the field of the profane +sciences, but only what propositions he must <emph>avoid</emph>. Thus +<pb n='089'/><anchor id='Pg089'/> +every science is left free to pursue its own method of research. +It is not difficult to understand this. +</p> + +<p> +Faith draws from divine revelation; profane sciences, as +such, do not draw from divine revelation, but only from experience +and reason. Philosophy would cease to be philosophy +and become theology did it demonstrate the immortality of the +soul by revelation. The anthropologist would cease to be an +anthropologist and become a theologian if he would attempt to +prove the common origin of mankind by Holy Scripture. +</p> + +<p> +In other words, the profane sciences are distinguished from +faith and theology by their formal object, by the end they have +in view, by the scientific method with which they handle their +subject. Theology, of course, uses revelation extensively; and +in this it differs from the other sciences. Hence faith cannot +command the anthropologist to defend also in profane science +the common origin of the human race from Adam and Eve, +because it is held to be a revealed truth. He must say: I +believe as a Christian that this is true, established by divine +revelation, and no science will ever prove the contrary; but +whether I can positively defend this fact as resulting from +anthropology, depends on my ability to corroborate it by the +methods of this science, that is by the testimony of profane +history. And just as little could the historian be required to +obtain historical results of which he cannot produce the evidence +according to his method. +</p> + +<p> +Therefore faith can only tell the profane scientist that he +must not assert anything which is held by faith to be erroneous; +that it is false to say there is nothing but force and +matter, that the human soul ends in death, or that the various +families of the human race have not a common origin. As soon +as the scientist knows by faith that a thing is false, he is bound +to refrain from asserting it: bound in the first place by the duty +to believe, but also by the principles of his own science, which +is to find not error, but truth, which forbids to assert what +has been proved to be erroneous. Perhaps his own means +will not enable him to prove the truth independently of revelation; +then from the standpoint of his science he must say, <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Non +liquet.</foreign> +</p> + +<pb n='090'/><anchor id='Pg090'/> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The position of the Catholic Church agrees with these principles. She +knows, and emphasizes that science has its own method, and hence a +natural right and freedom to proceed in its own field according to its +method. The Church rejects but one kind of freedom, viz., the freedom +to propound a doctrine proved by faith to be erroneous. <q>The Church +by no means forbids these disciplines to use in their own field their own +principles and method,</q> declares the Vatican Council. <q>But, while +acknowledging this lawful freedom, the Church takes care to prevent +them from taking up errors in opposition to divine teaching, or from +creating confusion by transgressing their limits and invading the realm +of faith</q> (Vat. sess. III, ch. 4. Cf. also the letter of <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX</hi>., <q>Gravissimas,</q> +of Dec. 11, 1862, to the Archbishop of Munich, Denz. n. 1666, +<hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>) +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +These few remarks show the lack of intelligence in the +charge that <q>Catholic philosophy starts from dogmas and revelation,</q> +or that the Church would dictate to scientists everything +they should teach; that, according to its principles it +could claim the right <q>to impose upon a physicist of <hi rend='italic'>Zeppelin's</hi> +era the task of proving the Ascension of Christ or the Assumption +of Mary by aërostatic rules.</q> This is simply gross ignorance +or misrepresentation. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>3. Restraint Only in the Province of Revelation.</head> + +<p> +In what matters may faith and the Church be a guide to +research in this negative sense? In all fields, or only some? +Evidently only in their own sphere. But to the sphere of faith +belongs only what is contained in divine revelation, viz., the +truths of <emph>religion and morality</emph>, as laid down in Scripture +and tradition, the truths of God and His work of salvation, +of man and his way to his eternal destiny, of the means of +grace, and of the Church. Whatever lies outside of that sphere +does not belong to the province of faith. This is true also +of the teaching authority of the Church. The purpose of the +Church is to guard faithfully the treasure of divine revelation +and to transmit it in an authoritative manner to mankind: hence +her authority in teaching is confined to what is contained in +revelation, and what is necessary for an efficient custody and +transmission of it to mankind. Hence she may declare certain +truths as revealed, she may reject opposing errors, she may condemn +books offensive to faith, she may approve or reject systems +<pb n='091'/><anchor id='Pg091'/> +of ethics. But she cannot set up wholly new religious truths +or revelations. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Depositum custodi</foreign>—this is the purpose of +the Church. Still less are matters of an entirely profane nature +subject to the teaching authority of the Church. Profane +sciences can therefore receive direction from faith only in those +matters which at the same time belong to the province of faith. +</p> + +<p> +What follows from this? It follows that <emph>almost all the +profane sciences are incapable of being instructed or +restricted by faith</emph>, because their province lies outside +that of faith, and does not come in touch with it: they are left +to themselves to correct their errors. When the astronomer in +his observatory watches the movements of the planets, and bases +thereon his mathematical calculations, when the physicist or +chemist in his laboratory observes the laws of nature or makes +new discoveries, when the pathologist studies the symptoms of +diseases in organisms, no warning voice interrupts their work +of study. Of course when they deny the creation, the possibility +of miracles, then they conflict with faith; but then they +have ceased to be naturalists, they have become philosophers. +When the botanist or zoölogist in his laboratory is studying +plants and animals and collecting his specimens, when the +palæontologist is excavating and examining his fossils, they +enjoy perfect freedom: all this has nothing directly to do +with faith. And there is no warning sign set up for the geographer +or geologist when settling the orographical or hydrographical +conditions of countries or measuring geological strata; +no danger signal disturbs the linguist in establishing the grammar +of unknown languages, nor the archæologist or the historian, +when they discover new documents or decipher inscriptions. +Nor does anybody interrupt the mathematician in his +calculations. +</p> + +<p> +What unnecessary worry, then, for the representatives of +mathematics, geology, palæontology, and chemistry to write +burning protests against the fetters of dogma in the interest of +their scientific activity! And it is superfluous worry for professors +of the technical arts to get excited by imagining that +electricity and steam must be treated according to ecclesiastical +precepts. Nor is there need of emphasizing the statement that +<pb n='092'/><anchor id='Pg092'/> +there cannot be a Catholic chemistry, geography, or mathematics—it +is self-evident. +</p> + +<p> +Hence almost the entire province of the profane sciences, +which are the pride of our age and occupy the foremost +position in our universities, with their laboratories, institutes +and observatories and meteorological stations, are free and perfectly +undisturbed by faith. If accordingly any one should be +of the opinion that the Christian-minded scientist were hindered +in his scientific research, he would have to consider him an unhampered +investigator at least in this vast field. +</p> + +<p> +Most in touch with faith comes <emph>philosophy</emph>. Not in the +vast field of logic, of empirical psychology, in questions concerning +the essence of bodies and their forces, in matters of +mere history of philosophy; but in questions of views of the +world and life, in metaphysics and ethics, it does. These, +the highest questions, bearing on the direction and pursuit of +human life, matters that most occupy the human mind, are at +the same time subjects of revelation; God Himself has deigned +to teach the truth in these matters, to make them safe for all +time against the error of the mind of man. Here philosophers +encounter danger-signals. They hear, what their reason even +tells them, that it is erroneous to think there is no world of spirits, +no God above nature, no immortality, no life hereafter, no +providence. Nor could one say that philosophy is the loser by +being kept from error which endangers human life. Nowhere +are errors so apt to occur as in questions which are outside the +sphere of immediate experience; nowhere are self-deceptions +more common than there, where disposition and character continually +influence the mind. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +A modern representative of philosophy, <hi rend='italic'>E. Adickes</hi>, writes as follows: +<q>In the course of this history (of metaphysics) there have been given +long since all the principal answers that are at all possible to all metaphysical +questions. The building up of metaphysical systems can and +will proceed, nevertheless, and their multiplicity will remain.... Of +course, progress will not be gained thereby: results will not gain in +certainty, contradictions and mysteries do not diminish.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>If the greatest of the ancient Greek natural scientists, physicians, +and geographers should rise again they would be amazed at the progress +made in their sciences; like beginners they would sit at the feet of +teachers of our day, they would lack the most elementary ideas; they +<pb n='093'/><anchor id='Pg093'/> +would first have to learn what every grammar-school boy knows, and +much of what they once considered achievements would be disclosed to +them as deception or mere hypothesis. On the other hand a <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, an +<hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, a <hi rend='italic'>Zeno</hi> or <hi rend='italic'>Epicurus</hi>, might readily take part in our discussions +about God and the soul, about virtue and immortality. And they +could safely use their old weapons, the keenness of which has suffered +but little from the rust of time and the attacks of opponents. They +would be astonished at the little progress made, so that now, after two +thousand years, the same answers are given to the same questions.</q> +(Charakter und Weltanschauung, 1905, p. 24). +</p> + +<p> +A science which must make such a confession has no reason to reject +with haughty self-confidence the intimations of a divine revelation. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The <emph>science of history</emph> again has not the duty of praising +everything that has happened within the Catholic Church +or else to repress it; no, only the truth is desired. But it must +not start out with the assumption that God's influence in the +world, a divine revelation, miracles, and a supernatural guidance +of the Church, are impossible; nor must it attempt to construe +history according to that assumption. Hence it must not +undertake to explain the religion of the Jewish nation, or the +origin of Christianity, by unconditionally ignoring everything +supernatural, and attempting to eliminate it by prejudiced research +and by means of natural factors, whether they be called +Babylonic myths or Greek philosophy or anything else; it must +not impugn the credibility of the Gospel, claiming that reports +of miracles must be false; it must not write the history of the +Church and deliberately ignore its supernatural character, as +if it were the violent struggle of a federation of priests for universal +rule. Assured results undoubtedly are arrived at in history +less frequently than in other sciences; it offers full +play to suppositions, hypotheses, constructive fancy, the influence +of ideas inculcated by education and personal views of +the world, especially when summing up facts. Hence here +more than anywhere else must moral character and unselfish +love of the truth stand higher than the desire for freedom. +</p> + +<p> +The <emph>history of religion</emph> and <emph>anthropology</emph> must be forbidden +to assume that the human mind is but a product of +animal evolution, that therefore religion and morality, family +and state life, reason and language, and the entire intellectual +and social life have necessarily evolved from the first stages +<pb n='094'/><anchor id='Pg094'/> +of animal life. If we add that <emph>jurisprudence</emph> in its highest +principles comes in touch with faith, and that it also must +not dispute the divine right of the Church, we have mentioned +the most important sciences and instances in which the investigator +must take faith into consideration. +</p> + +<p> +We now understand in what sense we may rightly speak +of a <q><emph>Christian philosophy and science</emph></q> or of a <q><emph>Catholic +science of history</emph>.</q> Surely not in this sense that philosophy +and history have to draw their results from Holy Scripture +or from the dogmatical decisions of the Church; nor +in the sense that they have to make positive defence for everything +that the Church finds it necessary to prescribe. The sense +is merely this: they guide themselves by faith, as we said +above, by refraining from propositions and presumptions proved +by faith to be false. In a large measure this is also the meaning +of the often-misrepresented term, <emph>Catholic University</emph>. In +the reverse sense we may speak of a liberal science. It is that +science which in the field of philosophy and religion guides itself +by the principles of liberalism and the principle of liberal freedom +and the rejection of faith. But to speak of a Catholic, +Protestant, Liberal chemistry or mathematics, has no sense at +all, because these disciplines, like most other profane sciences, +have no direct connection with Catholicism, Protestantism, or +Liberalism. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +That we have stated correctly the <emph>attitude of the Catholic Church</emph> +is evidenced by more than one official document. In the decree of the +Holy Office of July 3, 1907, the so-called Syllabus of <hi rend='italic'>Pius X.</hi>, the following +(5.) proposition is condemned: <q>Inasmuch as the treasure of +faith contains only revealed truths, it does not behoove the Church under +any consideration to pass judgment on the assertions made by human +sciences.</q> Similarly was the proposition (14), likewise condemned +in the Syllabus of <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi>: <q>Philosophy must be pursued without +any regard to supernatural revelation.</q> +</p> + +<p> +These condemnations stirred up anger: <q>Now,</q> it was said, <q>the +Church wants to subject the whole of human knowledge to her judgment: +this is unbearable insolence.</q> But what follows from these condemnations? +The opposite truth asserted in them is this: the Church in +one respect must pass judgment on the assertions made by human +science, namely, in so far as they come in conflict with the doctrines of +faith. The only freedom rejected by the Council is the freedom to contradict +revealed truth: it must not be held <q>that human science may +be pursued with freedom, that its assertions can be considered true and +<pb n='095'/><anchor id='Pg095'/> +must not be rejected by the Church even if they contradict a revealed +doctrine.</q> (sess. III, ch. 4, can. 2). The Church does not want to +judge on matters of profane science; but she claims the right, due to +her as guardian appointed for the preservation of the pure faith, to +raise her warning voice when, for instance, natural science transgresses +its limits and trespasses on the province of religion by denying the +creation of the world. It is but self-defence against an attack upon +her inviolable domain. But she does not claim the authority to sit in +judgment upon the results of astro-physics, upon the atom-hypothesis, +or its opposite; or on the acceptance of a theory about ions or +earthquakes. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Another question may be touched upon: Is the <emph>Catholic +historian</emph> free to proceed steadily in the search after historic +truth, even where he discovers facts which do not reflect honour +on his Church? And where it is a question of uncertain, private +revelation, of doubtfulness of relics and other sacred objects +exposed for public worship, may he proceed undisturbed with his +critical research, or is he restrained by ecclesiastical authority? +</p> + +<p> +Should the Catholic meet with dark passages in the history of +his Church, then every well-meaning observer will demand that +he display in the treatment of such matters a pious forbearance +for his Church. His respect for her will dictate this. +Unsparing criticism and hunting for blemishes and shadows +must be excluded. But he cannot on this account be bound to +pass by the unpleasant facts he may meet in his researches, or +to cloak or deny them against his better knowledge. He knows +that the divinity of his Church shows itself to best advantage +just because, notwithstanding many weaknesses and faults, +past and present, she passes unvanquished and imperishable +through all storms,—a token of the supernatural origin of her +strength and power of endurance. +</p> + +<p> +It was this very thought that moved <hi rend='italic'>Leo XIII.</hi> to open the +Vatican Archives for freest research to friend and enemy,—the +clearest proof that could possibly be given that the Church does +not fear historical truth. In his letter of admonition, of August +18, 1883, urging the fostering of historiography, the same Pope +gives the following rules for the Catholic scientist: <q>The first +law of history is that it must not say anything false; the second, +that it must not be afraid of saying the truth, lest a suspicion +of partiality and unfairness arise.</q> An excellent example of +<pb n='096'/><anchor id='Pg096'/> +the application of these rules is found in <hi rend='italic'>L. v. Pastor's</hi> <q>History +of the Popes,</q> especially in what he says about <hi rend='italic'>Alexander +VI.</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Leo X.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +In his historical investigation of private revelations, such as +those of <hi rend='italic'>St. Gertrude</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>St. Mechtild</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bl. Juliana of Liège</hi>, or of +relics and objects of veneration, the historian is likewise not +restricted by Church-direction. Having merely the task of preserving +the treasure of the faith received from Christ and the +Apostles, the Church in her function as Teacher never vouches +for the divine origin of new, private revelations, nor for the accuracy +of pious traditions of another kind. True, she decides +authoritatively whether private revelations contain anything +against faith and morals, but she decides nothing more. +If she accepts such revelations or traditions as genuine, she +claims for the facts in question only that human faith which +corresponds to their historical proof. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This is clearly stated by the recent encyclical <hi rend='italic'>Pascendi</hi>: <q>In judging +of pious traditions, the following must be kept in mind: the +Church employs such prudence in treating of these matters that she +does not allow such traditions to be written about except with great +precaution and only after making the declarations required by <hi rend='italic'>Urban +VIII.</hi>; and even then, after this has been properly done, the Church +by no means asserts the truth of the private revelation or of the +tradition, but merely permits them to be believed, provided there be +sufficient human reasons. It was in this sense that the Sacred Congregation +of Rites declared thirty-one years ago: <q>These apparitions +are neither approved nor condemned by the Holy See; it merely permits +them to be believed in a natural way, provided the tradition on which +they rest be corroborated by credible testimonies and documents.</q> +Whoever follows this maxim is safe. The veneration of such things +is always conditional, it is only relative, and on the condition that +the tradition be true. In so far only is the veneration absolute as it +relates to the Saint to whom the veneration is paid. The same +applies to the veneration of relics.</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Benedict XIV.</hi> says of private +revelations: <q>Praedictis revelationibus etsi <hi rend='italic'>approbatis</hi>, non debere +nec posse a nobis adhiberi assensum fidei catholicae, sed tantum +fidei humanae juxta regulas prudentiae, juxta quas praedictae revelationes +sunt probabiles et pie credibiles.</q> De Serv. Dei beatificatione, III, +c. ult. n. 15). +</p> + +<p> +Hence the historian is free to investigate such traditions critically, +provided, of course, that he does not violate the reverence due to sacred +things. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<pb n='097'/><anchor id='Pg097'/> + +<div> +<head>4. Infallible and Non-Infallible Teachings.</head> + +<p> +Now to consider a last point. Does it not rest entirely with +the pleasure of ecclesiastical authority, as would seem from what +has been said above, to suppress at any time the results, or at +least the hypotheses, of scientific research by pointing to putative +truths of faith presumed to be in opposition? Then, of +course, the scientist would be at the mercy of a zealous ecclesiastical +authority. Or will it perhaps be said that this authority +is infallible in its every decision? Think of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, of the +interdict against the Copernican view of the world, and you will +be able fully to appreciate the danger alluded to! +</p> + +<p> +We shall later on return to the famous case of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>. For +the present we only call attention to a distinction which must +not be overlooked, the distinction between infallible teachings +and those that are not infallible.<note place='foot'>Infallible teachings are often also called dogmas. But they are not +always dogmas in the strict sense. In the strict sense dogmas are such +truths as are contained in divine revelation, and are proclaimed by the +infallible teaching authority of the Church to be believed as such by +the faithful. In a broader sense those tenets are often called dogmas +which are presented by revelation or by the Church as infallible truths. +In this sense all teachings of faith clearly found in Holy Scripture are +dogmas, even if not declared by the Church. In this sense Protestants, +too, believe in revealed dogmas.</note> +</p> + +<p> +According to Catholic teaching, the universal teaching body of +the Church, when declaring unanimously to be an object of +faith something relating to faith and morals, is endowed with +<emph>infallibility</emph>, and also when in its daily practice of the faith +it unanimously professes a doctrine to be a truth of faith. This +infallibility is also possessed by the Pope alone when, acting in +his capacity as Supreme Teacher of the Church in matters of +faith and morals, he intends to give a permanent decision for the +whole Church (ex cathedra). +</p> + +<p> +Besides these infallible teachings there are also <emph>non-infallible</emph> +teachings, and they are the more frequent. Such are, first +of all, the ordinary doctrinal utterances of the Pope himself in +his regular supervision of the teaching of doctrine: these instructions +and declarations are of a lower kind than those peremptory +<pb n='098'/><anchor id='Pg098'/> +ones that are pronounced ex cathedra: he is infallible +only in the utterance of these ultimate, supreme decisions, the +chief bulwark, as it were, erected against the floods of error. +Decisions ex cathedra are very rare. Encyclical letters, too, are, +as a rule, not infallible. It is self-evident that the theological +opinions and statements of the Pope as a private person, not as +Supreme Head of the Church, do not belong here at all. They +have no official character and are in no way binding. +</p> + +<p> +Among decisions that are not infallible are further included, +in various degrees, the doctrinal utterances of Bishops, of particular +synods, and especially those of the Roman Congregations. +The latter are bodies of Cardinals, delegated by the +Head of the Church, as highest Papal boards, to co-operate +with him in the various offices of administration. Of +these, the Congregation of the Holy Office and that of the +Index may also render decisions on doctrinal questions. +Although the Congregations act by virtue of their delegation +from the Pope, and publish their decrees with his consent, the +decisions are not decisions of the Pope himself, but remain decisions +of the Cardinals. Much less can the infallibility of the +Pope pass over to them: it is his personal prerogative, the aid of +the Holy Ghost is promised to him, and protects his judgments +under certain conditions against error. +</p> + +<p> +But the Catholic owes submission also to the non-infallible +teachings; and not only an outer submission, a reverent silence, +that offends not either verbally or in writing against the decision +rendered, but he owes also his inner assent. But it cannot be +that unconditional inner assent which he owes to the infallible +decision, for this he holds to be irrevocably certain; nor is +his assent to non-infallible decisions a real act of faith. He +is not given any unconditional guarantee of the truth. An error +is, of course, most unlikely, but not absolutely impossible. +Hence the faithful Catholic should always be ready to accept +such decisions in as far as they are warranted by recognized +truth. This applies to all kinds of doctrinal teaching, but of +course in different ways, corresponding to the degree of authority,—for +instance, Papal decisions are of higher authority +than those of the Congregations,—yet it applies also to the +<pb n='099'/><anchor id='Pg099'/> +doctrinal decisions of the Congregations, because they are the +ordinary teaching organs of the Church. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +When the Congregation of the Index, 1857, had forbidden the works +of <hi rend='italic'>Guenther</hi> and many thought they could evade the decision, <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> +wrote, June 15, to the Archbishop of Cologne: <q>The decree is so far-reaching +that nobody may think himself free not to hold what we have +confirmed.</q> Similar was what the Pope had written to the Archbishop of +Mecheln after the condemnation of the ontological errors of <hi rend='italic'>Ubagh</hi>. The +Motu proprio of <hi rend='italic'>Pius X.</hi> of November 8, 1907, speaks similarly of the +obligation of submission to the decisions of the Papal Biblical Commission +relating to doctrines, and to the decrees of Congregations when +approved by the Pope. (Cf. also the Syllabus of Pius IX., sent. 22.) +</p> + +<p> +Theologians agree that this requisite internal assent is not the +same as irrevocable assent. This was also declared by <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> in his +letter to the Archbishop of Munich-Freising, saying that this inner +submission is by no means faith; and no theologian will ascribe infallibility +to a mere congregational decree. (See on this point: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> +<hi rend='italic'>Grisar</hi>, Galileistudien, 1882, 171 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi> Cr. <hi rend='italic'>Pesch</hi>, Theol. Zeitfragen, +Erste Folge, 1900, III. <hi rend='italic'>Egger</hi>, Streiflichter ueber die freiere Bibelforschung, +1889.) +</p> + +<p> +It would be erroneous to think that only in recent times, after the +embarrassment caused by the regrettable <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> decision the subtle +distinction had been invented that congregational decisions are not binding +on Catholics with absolute force. This was taught by theologians +long before the <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> case caused any excitement. In this sense the +celebrated writer on Moral Theology, <hi rend='italic'>Lacroix</hi>, said: <q>The declarations +of none of these Congregations are infallible.... No infallibility is +promised to the Congregation in so far as it is viewed as separate +from the Pope</q> (Theologia Moralis, 1729, I, n. 215). <hi rend='italic'>Raccioli</hi>, soon +after the <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> trial, wrote: <q>The Holy Congregation of Cardinals as +separate from the Pope cannot give to any proposition the proper authority +of faith.</q> And he adds: <q>There being extant no decision of the +Pope, or of a Council directed and confirmed by him, the proposition of +the sun moving and the earth standing still cannot on the strength +of a congregational decree be considered a truth that must be believed</q> +(Almagestum novum, 1651, I, 52). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The obligation to give interior assent also to an authority not +infallible, cannot seem strange if this authority offers a +guarantee for the truth commensurate to the assent demanded. +We certainly ask of a child to receive the instruction from his +parent and teacher with internal assent, so far as the latter +does not run counter to its instinct for the truth, else the education +of the child and the needful influence over its intellectual +life would be impossible. Upon the Church has been bestowed +by her divine Founder the task of guiding the faithful +<pb n='100'/><anchor id='Pg100'/> +authoritatively in the educational matters committed to the +Church, and not only in their youth but throughout their +lives. This guidance in religion and morality would be impossible +if the faithful could constantly deny their internal assent +to the instruction of the Church, which is given generally in +a form that is not infallible. The full power of the Church to +teach with authority implies a corresponding duty of the faithful +to assent to her teachings as far as this is possible. Does not +the scientific specialist think himself obliged to accept a proposition +on the strength of a certain authority, even if the latter's infallibility +is not established? He reads in his scientific periodical +and finds in it the report of special researches made by a colleague. +He cannot examine them over again, yet he accepts them +because of the reliability of his colleague, in which he sees the +guarantee of truth. Likewise, only more so, does the Catholic +owe it to his sense of truth to impose upon himself an +assent even where the representatives of the teaching authority +of the Church are not endowed in their decision with the gift of +infallibility. For he knows that even in such teachings the +Church is commonly under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, who +will seldom tolerate error. He is promised to the teaching +Church for the safe guidance of the faithful; these declarations +are, however, the ordinary doctrinal utterances of that ecclesiastical +office. And the Holy Ghost cannot permit that the teaching +authority should by a wrong decision forfeit the confidence +it enjoys. +</p> + +<p> +Moreover, this authority ranks very high even when looked at +from a purely human standpoint. Those who are invested +with it are mostly men of great learning, competent to give +such doctrinal decisions by virtue of their experience and position, +and learned advisers are at their side. They are guided by +the tradition and wisdom of a universal Church, which measures +its history by thousands of years: the decisions, too, are +for the most part but the application or repetition of previous +doctrinal utterances. Besides, there is the hesitating caution +which advances to a decision only after long deliberations, and +in undemonstrated matters usually refrains from decision; a +caution which has increased still more in recent times, since so +<pb n='101'/><anchor id='Pg101'/> +many subtle questions have arisen on the boundaries of science +and faith. It is also known that many inquisitive eyes are constantly +turned on Rome, and a single wrong decision might entail +most disagreeable consequences for friend and foe. The +pressure must be very great before a much-disputed question is +taken up at all. +</p> + +<p> +Of course it is by no means impossible that difficulties may +pile up in such a way that an error may really be made. History +knows of such a case. But the very fact that the one case of +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> is always quoted, and, therefore, that in the long history +of the Congregations this is considered to be almost the only +case of importance, is a proof how carefully the Congregations +proceed, and that supernatural aid is granted them. An institution +which in the course of its long existence had to reply to +innumerable questions and against which only one wrong decision +of importance can be pointed out, must necessarily be +an exemplary institution. An institution so free from human +error must surely be guided by the Holy Ghost. Compare with +this the many cases in which science has had to correct itself, +had to abandon its long-championed propositions as untenable. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, in a given case, the decision is not difficult for the +Catholic. On one side stand the representatives of a science +which has erred, very often, incomparably more frequently than +the ecclesiastical teaching authority, and which lacks the +special aid of God. On the other side is the ecclesiastical +authority, which has almost never erred, and which +enjoys special divine aid; moreover, it examines into its questions +with greater caution and care, because it has more to lose. +In addition it is almost invariably able to point to a large +number, and frequently the majority, of savants who indorse its +decisions, because these mostly concern disputed questions not +yet scientifically determined. Hence the Catholic will find +no difficulty in presuming that the decision is in accord with +the truth; the more so because, as a rule, he himself is unable +to examine scientifically both sides of the question. +</p> + +<p> +Should any one, nevertheless, be clearly convinced, by substantial +and valid reasons, that there has been prejudgment, then +he would not be any longer obliged to give it his interior +<pb n='102'/><anchor id='Pg102'/> +assent: truth before all else. It would be easy, too, by presenting +reliable information to an authoritative quarter, to secure +the triumph of the truth. However, in this case a man must +be ever on his guard against the tendency to overrate his own +arguments. In excitement he easily thinks himself to be certainly +in the right, but when considering the matter quietly +before God and his conscience, he will rarely come to the conclusion +that it would be wise to set his judgment above the decision. +In the case of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> the decision of the Congregation +was by no means opposed by a clear conviction of the truth +of the opposite. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Take, for instance, a more recent decision of the Congregation, forbidding +craniotomy. It has often been denounced. The question was +submitted to the Congregation of the Holy Office whether it were permissible +to teach that craniotomy is allowable in case the mother cannot +give birth to the child, and that both will have to die unless the +child be killed and removed by a surgical operation. The Congregation +answered twice in the negative, in May and August, 1889. +Neither craniotomy, nor any operation implying the direct murder of +the child or mother can be taught to be permissible. The reason on +which the answers were based is that the direct murder of an innocent +person in order to save human life is never allowable; and this applies +to the murder of a child, which has as much right to its life as any +other person. In the case of craniotomy we have the direct murder +of the child. We, too, shall have to admit, if we judge according to +the objective morality of the action, that the Congregation is in the +right; though it may seem hard to let both mother and child die +rather than take a life directly, we shall have to admit that it +is more in accord with the sanctity of the moral law than the opposite, +though the latter may seem preferable to medical practice. Viewed +in the interest of truth and the purity of the moral law, it is gratifying +to know that there is a court courageous enough to uphold this +law always and everywhere, even when it becomes hard. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +So much about assenting to doctrinal decisions that are not +infallible. +</p> + +<p> +In regard to <emph>infallible</emph> decisions, the Catholic knows that +there are certain truths which no result of science can contradict. +To these decisions he owes unconditional submission, and he +gives it with conviction: he knows the promise, <q>I am with you +always, even unto the consummation of the world.</q> New decisions +of this kind are very rare. When the dogma of the +Infallibility of the Pope was proclaimed in 1870, the fear +<pb n='103'/><anchor id='Pg103'/> +was frequently expressed that the Head of the Roman Church +would hasten to make the fullest use of this prerogative, by erecting +theological barriers at all nooks and corners in the realm of +thought. The fear did not come true; it was unfounded. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +A Protestant scientist wrote recently: <q>Those who thought <hi rend='italic'>Doellinger's</hi> +prediction of a prolific crop of dogmas would come true were +disappointed. There has been no new dogma pronounced since 1870, +although there were many pious opinions that certain circles would +have been only too glad to see confirmed. On looking calmly at the +dogma of infallibility it is seen that it was, after all, not so bad +as had been feared during the first excitement</q> (<hi rend='italic'>K. Holl</hi>, Modernismus, +1908, p. 9, Religionsgesch. Volksbuecher, IV, 7, Heft). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We may get a good idea of the precaution taken prior to the +proclamation of an infallible decision by perusing the History of +the Vatican Council, published by <hi rend='italic'>Granderath</hi>, in three volumes. +He describes the proceedings with conscientious objectiveness. +He shows how minutely all questions had been previously +studied, with all the available means of scientific investigation, +and how minutely and freely they were discussed by the most +venerable representatives of the Catholic world. +</p> + +<p> +Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Gibbons</hi>, Archbishop of Baltimore, gave his impressions +of the Vatican Council as follows: +</p> + +<p> +<q rend='pre'>I happened to be the youngest Bishop that attended the +Council of the Vatican, and, while my youth and inexperience +imposed on me a discreet silence among my elders, I do not +remember to have missed a single session, and I was an attentive +listener at all the debates.... I think I am not exaggerating +when I say that the Council of the Vatican has been excelled +by few, if any, deliberative assemblies, civil or ecclesiastical, +that have ever met, whether we consider the <emph>maturity</emph> of years +of its members, their <emph>learning</emph>, their <emph>experience</emph> and <emph>piety</emph>, or +the widespread influence of the <hi rend='italic'>Decrees</hi> that they framed for the +spiritual and moral welfare of the Christian Republic.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q rend='pre'>The youngest Bishop in the Council was thirty-six years +old. Fully three-fourths of the Prelates ranged between fifty-six +and ninety years. The great majority, therefore, had grown +gray in the service of their Divine Master. Several Fathers of +the Church, bent with age, might be seen passing through St. +<pb n='104'/><anchor id='Pg104'/> +Peter's Basilica to the council chamber every morning, leaning +with one hand on their staff, the other resting on the shoulder +of their secretary. One or two blind Bishops could be observed, +guided by their servants, as they advanced to their posts +with tottering steps, determined to aid the Church in their declining +years by the wisdom of their counsel, as they had consecrated +to her their vigorous manhood by their Apostolic labours.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q rend='pre'>But to the gravity of years the members of the Council generally +united profound and varied learning....</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q rend='pre'>They were men, too, of world-wide experience and close observation. +Each Bishop brought with him an intimate knowledge +of the history of his country and of the religious, moral, +social, and political condition of the people among whom he lived. +One could learn more from an hour's interview with this living +encyclopædia of divines, who were a world in miniature, than +from a week's study of books.... The most ample liberty of +discussion prevailed in the Council. This freedom the Holy +Father pledged at the opening of the synod, and the pledge was +religiously kept. I can safely say that neither in the British +House of Commons, nor in the French Chambers, nor in the +German Reichstag, nor in our American Congress, would a +wider liberty of debate be tolerated than was granted in the +Vatican Council. The presiding Cardinal exhibited a courtesy +of manner and a forbearance even in the heat of debate that was +worthy of all praise. I do not think that he called a speaker +to order more than a dozen times during the eighty-nine sessions, +and then only in deference to the dissenting murmurs +or demands of some Bishops. A Prelate representing the smallest +diocese had the same rights that were accorded to the highest +dignitary in the Chamber. There was no limit prescribed as +to the length of the speeches. We may judge of the wide scope +of discussion from the single fact that the debate on the Infallibility +of the Pope lasted two months, occupying twenty-five sessions, +and was participated in by one hundred and twenty-five +Prelates, not counting one hundred others who handed in written +observations. No stone was left unturned, no text of Sacred +Scripture, no passage in the writings of the Fathers, no page +of Ecclesiastical History bearing on the subject, escaped the +<pb n='105'/><anchor id='Pg105'/> +vigilant investigations of the Bishops, so that the whole truth +of God might be brought to light....</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>The most important debate in the Council was that on the +Infallibility of the Pope. It may be proper to observe here that +the discussion was rather on the expediency or opportuneness of +defining the dogma than on the intrinsic truth of the doctrine +itself. The number of Prelates who questioned the claim of +Papal Infallibility could be counted on the fingers of a single +hand. Many of the speakers, indeed, impugned the dogma, not +because they did not personally accept it, but with the view of +pointing out the difficulties with which the teaching body of the +Church would have to contend in vindicating it before the world. +I have listened in the council chamber to far more subtle, more +plausible, and more searching objections against this prerogative +of the Pope than I have ever read or heard from the pen or +tongue of the most learned and formidable Protestant assailant</q> +(North American Review, April, 1894). +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Obedience of Faith and Freedom of Action.</head> + +<p> +In looking back at what has been said, we see the justice +of the question: where is here any real injury to lawful freedom +in thought and scientific research? In most of the +profane sciences the scientist receives no directions from the +authority of faith; he is altogether free, as long as he +keeps within his province. In some matters he is given a +list of errors to beware of: these are in the first place the +great questions concerning views of the world and life, of +which, after all, it is very difficult to obtain scientific knowledge. +But here he knows, through the conviction he has of the +truth of his faith, that he is offered the truth free from error +and prejudice. +</p> + +<p> +It is true, adhering to a religious authority implies restraint. +But it is only the restraint of truth. Truth does not lose its +claim upon the mind because it is offered to the latter by +a supernatural authority; much less does the Creator lose the +right to the tribute of homage of his rational creature; and this +tribute is rendered by voluntary submission to the revealed +<pb n='106'/><anchor id='Pg106'/> +truth. Upon the Church, however, has been laid the task of +preserving unadulterated the legacy of her Founder from generation +to generation. She is responsible before God and history +for the faithful presentation of the most sacred inheritance +of mankind. Therefore the Church must raise her voice when +the puny thoughts of men, called science and progress, rise +against the saving truth to disparage, to falsify, to annihilate +it. <emph>It is not science the Church opposes, but error</emph>; not +truth, but the emancipation of the human mind from God's +authority, an emancipation that is trying to hide its real self +under the guise of scientific truth. +</p> + +<p> +<q>The Church,</q> says the Vatican Council (Sess. III, ch. 4), +<q>having received with her apostolic office to teach, the obligation +of preserving the legacy of the faith, has also the God-given right +and duty to condemn what is falsely called science, 'lest any +one be cheated by philosophy and vain deceit.'</q> That the denial +of the faith is flippantly called science does not alter the case. +What determines the attitude of the Church is not eagerness +to rule, not a propensity to apply force to the mind, but loyalty +to her vocation. If it is disagreeable for any superior to have +to correct those under him, then it requires an heroic strength +and courage to cry out time and again to the whole world +and its leading minds, <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Errastis</foreign>, you have erred! It requires +heroism to reject, to oppose and condemn, time and again, propositions +sailing under the flag of progress, light and enlightenment, +in spite of the protest of those concerned, who denounce +whatever opposes them as darkness and retrogression. How +much easier it would be to fawn upon the pet ideas of the +age, Neo-protestantism and Modernism, and thus to gain their +approval, than to hear repeatedly the distressing words, <q>We +will not have her to rule over us—<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>crucifige, crucifige</foreign>!</q> +</p> + +<p> +But why not let <emph>science correct itself</emph>? Why these violent +condemnations and indictments? Science, by virtue of its instinct +for the truth will by itself find the way back, when it +has gone on the wrong track; only be patient. Science has in +itself the cure for all its defects. Has it not already all by +itself overcome numerous errors in the course of the centuries? +Indeed, were there nothing at stake but scientific theories they +<pb n='107'/><anchor id='Pg107'/> +might be readily left to themselves: the loss to mankind would +not be great. But here there are more important issues at stake. +The protection of the faith, of truths of the vastest importance +for Christian life and the souls of men. And it is the duty of the +Church to protect her charges from going astray, from dangers +to salvation. How many thousands of them would suffer harm +before it would please science to correct its heresies! It often +takes a long time to pull down the idols placed upon pedestals, +and then it may be only to erect another idol. How long will +it take modern philosophy to agree that the will of man is free, +that there is a substantial immortal soul, that a Creator of +the world dwells above the heavens? Is the Church to wait till +the men of science make up their minds to desist from denying +the existence of a personal God, and to bow before the Creator +of heaven and earth? Should she meanwhile look on calmly how +such ruinous doctrines are pervading and penetrating society +deeper and deeper? Souls cannot wait thus to suffer shipwreck. +Finally, the duty to believe remains the same for all, for the +scientist, too—he is not free to delay his assent until he has +exhausted all his antagonistic scientific experiments. +</p> + +<p> +To be sure, the scientist is restricted in so far as he is +not allowed to pursue any and every hypothesis, regardless +of the immutable truth; he may no longer follow every +scientific fashion. But is this a real detriment to the human +intellect and science? Has not every science to bear <emph>restraint +from other sciences</emph> at all times? The adherent of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin's</hi> +theory of natural selection needs a billion years for his slow +evolution; but the geologist tells him that neither the formation +of the earth's surface nor the strata or sub-strata have taken +so long in formation—he corrects him. When the philosopher, +drawing the logical deductions from his materialistic views of +the world, assumes that the first living being sprang from lifeless +matter, the naturalist informs him that this is contradicted by +facts—there never has been a case of spontaneous generation. +The naturalist is corrected by the better experiment of men of +his profession, the scientific author is corrected by his critic. +Hence if a man submits to the guidance of other men of his profession, +if one science accepts direction from another science, +<pb n='108'/><anchor id='Pg108'/> +without any one seeing any injury to freedom therein, why, then, +should it be mental oppression for God's infallible wisdom to +call out through His Church to the fallible human mind: this is +error, I declare it so? When the guide-post points out to the +traveller that he is on the wrong way, will the wanderer indignantly +resent the correction as an interference with his freedom +of action? Is the railing along the steep precipice, to guard +against falling down, an interference with liberty? Is the +lighthouse, warning the sailor of cliffs and shoals, any interference +with his freedom? +</p> + +<p> +Generally those who oppose the Christian and Catholic duty +to believe use the following argument: Where there is restraint +and dependence there is no freedom; the Christian, and especially +the Catholic, is restrained and dependent; hence he is +not free: consequently he has no true science, because there can +be no true science without freedom. In the same way it may +be argued: The civilized nation is restrained in various ways by +the civil order, therefore it is not free. The careful writer of +scientific works is tied down on all sides by the rules of logic, +by the dictates of good style, by scientific usages: hence he is +not free. +</p> + +<p> +Let us not lose sight of the question. It cannot be denied +that the man who does not bother about faith has a greater +outer freedom than the man who does. We speak purposely of +outer freedom. It is quite another question, where real internal +freedom exists, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, freedom from the fetters of one's own +inclinations and prejudices,—in the religiously disciplined +mind, or in the other. Here we speak of inner freedom. Obviously +it is greater in the former. The deer in the forest is freer +in his movements than the cautious mountain-climber, who keeps +to marked roads and paths, so as to journey safely, yet the latter +is not without freedom. Nor will any one deny that the Australian +bushman enjoys a greater outer freedom than the civilized +white, restrained by laws, by rules and regulations, by standards +of decency. And the busy writer of many things and everything, +who in his writing never pays any attention to logic, to scientific +form, to style and tact, has more freedom than one who strictly +conforms to all these. +</p> + +<pb n='109'/><anchor id='Pg109'/> + +<p> +<emph>Every civilization, culture, and education implies +restriction of freedom</emph>, and the more the rejection of dependence +and laws increases the nearer we approach the state of uncultured +and barbarous nations. The same applies to intellectual +culture. The higher it is, the more learning and mental +culture a man has, the greater the number of truths, principles, +and intellectual standards he carries within him. By these he +is bound if he wants to advance into the higher spheres of +intellectuality. And the more the intellect rejects laws and +standards the more unregulated and dull its intellectual life +will become. The more one knows the more strictly is he bound +to truth in every respect; the less one knows the freer he is to +commit errors. This is no advantage, it is the privilege of the +ignorant and untrained mind. The believer is bound by religious +truth in the same way as one who knows the truth is +bound by it, while one who is ignorant of it is not. +</p> + +<p> +It is certainly not impossible for the obedience of faith to +create <emph>intellectual conflict</emph>. There may be cases when +scientific views look probable to the scientist, while they contradict +a doctrine of faith or an ecclesiastical decision. The roads +may even cross more radically. It may happen that his views +and books are condemned, forbidden by the Church. +</p> + +<p> +If the conflicting doctrine should be an <emph>infallible</emph> one, the +decision of the believing scientist is soon reached. He knows +now what to think of his hypothesis, that it is not true progress +but aberration, and consistency with his own conviction moves +him to desist. Thus the philosophical errors of modern times +are opposed almost throughout to infallible dogmas, for the +most part fundamental doctrines of the Christian religion. This +is also the legal right under which revelation and the Church approach +the scientist with the demand not to permit his views +to go contrary to faith, because there can never be a contradiction +between faith and reason. <q>There can never be a +contradiction between faith and reason,</q> the Vatican Council +teaches; <q>the apparent conflict is due either to the doctrine +not being understood and interpreted in the sense of the +Church, or to erroneous opinions that are mistaken for conclusions +of reason</q> (Conc. Vat. sess. III, cp. 4). If the Catholic +<pb n='110'/><anchor id='Pg110'/> +finds his position opposed to <emph>non-infallible</emph> decisions, +then he will re-examine his views in unselfish impartiality before +God. If he must calmly tell himself that his arguments are not +so weighty as to be able to stand up before so high an authority, +guided by the Holy Ghost, then he will forego the gratification +of holding fast to his own opinions, and will remind himself that +true wisdom knows the fallibility of the human mind, and is +ever ready to take advice from a divinely guided authority. Perhaps +he will recall the words of the great <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>: <q>Better +bow before an incomprehensible but saving symbol than entangle +one's neck in the meshes of error</q> (De doctr. Christ. III, 13). +This Christian self-denial surpasses in beauty even science itself, +and sheds upon it a greater splendour. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The great <hi rend='italic'>Fénelon</hi>, proceeding to his pulpit in the cathedral of Cambrai, +on Annunciation day in 1699, was handed by his brother the Roman +brief condemning twenty-three propositions of <hi rend='italic'>Fénelon's</hi> <q>Maximes des +Saints.</q> The Bishop took the writing, calmly ascended the pulpit and +announced it forthwith, and preached a sermon on the submission due +to ecclesiastical superiors, at which the whole congregation was greatly +moved. A few days later he announced in an episcopal letter to his +diocese his submission, <q>simple, absolute, and without a shadow of reservation.</q> +By this deed, an heroic act of obedience, <hi rend='italic'>Fénelon</hi> is placed +higher in history than by his brilliant works, than by the honour of +having been the illustrious tutor of the Dauphin of France. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Antonio Rosmini-Serbati</hi> in August, 1849, received official notice of +the condemnation of two of his works by the Congregation of the Index. +He immediately sent in his submission: <q>With the sentiments of a true +and obedient son of the Apostolic See, that I have always been by the +grace of God and wish ever to be, and have ever acknowledged myself, I +now declare clearly and sincerely, without reservation, my submission, in +the most complete manner, to the condemnation of my writings.</q> Both +the condemnation and the submission were soon made the target of +attack by the Liberal press. <hi rend='italic'>Rosmini</hi> replied in an admirable open +letter: <q>To my great sorrow I have seen several articles in different +newspapers which dare criticize the Holy Congregation of the Index for +condemning my writings. Inasmuch as I have submitted to the decree +of the said Congregation with all sincerity, and with full interior and +exterior obedience as becomes a true son of the Church, every one will +easily understand how much I regret these articles and disapprove of +them. Yet I deem it not superfluous to declare expressly that I reject +those articles entirely and that I do not accept the praise for me which +they offer. With regard to other newspaper writers, who are censuring me +and even insulting me for having done what it was my duty to do, in +submitting to the condemnation, as though I had committed a crime, I +can only say that I greatly pity them, and that they would fill me with +<pb n='111'/><anchor id='Pg111'/> +contempt could I deem it permissible to despise any one</q> (apud <hi rend='italic'>J. +Hilgers</hi>, Der Index der verbotenen Buecher, 1904, 413). +</p> + +<p> +A <hi rend='italic'>Fénelon</hi> or a <hi rend='italic'>Rosmini</hi>, bowing with the humility of the Christian +savant to the judgment of their Church, have thereby forfeited nothing +of their intellectual fame in the eyes of earnest critics, but, on the contrary, +have greatly increased the respect for their noble character. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Even should the future prove as scientifically correct that +which the believing scientist does not as yet clearly see, that he +was scientifically in the right, no considerable damage would +result to science. Providence, which guides human affairs, will +protect science for its noble modesty in submitting meanwhile +to an authority appointed by God. As a matter of fact, science +cannot be shown ever to have suffered any real loss by such +submission, not even in the <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> case, as we shall see further +on. On the other hand, countless are the errors and injuries +which have befallen human thought and belief, and which the +Church has warded off from those who yielded to her guidance. +Of course the submission may become difficult if a man clings +to his views, or has already publicly proclaimed them. Then, +indeed, a bitter struggle may ensue. A number of scientists +have failed to stand the test and have left to posterity the ill-fated +name of apostates. The Church regrets such cases; but +the deposit of faith is too precious to be endangered for the sake +of any individual. +</p> + +<p> +For this reason the Church is and must be <emph>conservative</emph>; for +this reason she may have to warn against the dissemination of +propositions which may not in themselves be false, but fraught +with danger for the time being. She cannot take part in any +hasty effort to make experiments, risking everything inherited +in order to try something new. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +During the nineteenth century the United States was repeatedly the +scene of communistic experiments. Daring adventurers assembled people +and founded settlements on communistic principles, private property +being abolished. In 1824 <hi rend='italic'>Robert Owen</hi> founded a colony in Indiana, +which soon grew to nine hundred members, living in the fashion of atheistic +communism. In 1825 the colony adopted its first constitution, +which within the following year suffered six complete revisions. In June +of the second year the last members of the colony ate their farewell +dinner together. The experiment had come to a speedy termination. A +Frenchman, <hi rend='italic'>Etienne Cabet</hi>, founded, in 1848, a new colony in Texas, +called Icaria. Soon it numbered 500 members. Each family had its small +<pb n='112'/><anchor id='Pg112'/> +homestead. Children were educated by the community. Amusement +was provided for by a band and a theatre; a library supplied more intellectual +wants. But soon it all fell into decay. <hi rend='italic'>Cabet</hi> departed and +died. In 1895 the newspapers reported the dissolution of the last remnant +of the colony. Such is the fate of experiments. +</p> + +<p> +Daring adventurers may undertake them. The lecturer at college, +too, will be readily pardoned for his eagerness to take up the cudgel in +defence of what is new in his profane science: he may easily correct himself. +But the Teacher of the Centuries and of the Nations, in the sphere +of religion and morals, has not the right to experiment. Here, where +mistakes may entail the direst consequences, the rule must be: slowly +onward, to keep the whole from ruin. Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Benedict Gaetani</hi>, later +Pope <hi rend='italic'>Boniface VIII.</hi>, once praised Rome for having <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>pedes non plumeos +sed plumbeos</foreign>—not winged feet, but leaden heels. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Sentiments of the kind just set forth are of course possible +only in conjunction with the belief in a revelation and in the +supernatural character of the Church, where the interests of +faith come first, and must be unconditionally preserved. He +who lacks this conviction, he to whom the Church is but a +human institution, founded in the course of time, tending perhaps +to oppose truth and science for fear they might endanger +the submission of minds—to such a one the Catholic's +confident devotion to his Church, and consciousness of unimpaired +freedom at the same time, will be unintelligible; and the +inflexibility of the Church in defending the faith will pass his +comprehension. And woe to the Church when her position +toward science is being tried before this court: only harsh denunciations +are to be expected where the judge does not understand +the matter he undertakes to decide. +</p> + +<p> +Nor do we attempt to bridge the chasm that separates the two +views of the world which we here again encounter, the one, which +rejects the supernatural world, the other, the view of the believing +Christian. We have but endeavoured to show that <emph>faith +does not restrain the mental freedom of one who is convinced +of the truth of his faith</emph>. Submission to the authority +of faith is the consequence of his conviction. This is the +question to be decided: Either there is a revelation and a +Church founded by God, or there is not. If such there be, or +if it is only possible, then modern freedom of thought, with its +demand of exemption from all authority, is against reason and +morality. If there is not, then this should be proved. It can +<pb n='113'/><anchor id='Pg113'/> +be done consistently only by acknowledging atheism. For if +there is a personal God, then He can give a revelation and found +a Church, and demand submission from all. Since the days of +<hi rend='italic'>Celsus</hi> to this day the attempt to demonstrate that the convictions +of a faithful Christian are unjustifiable has proved futile. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Obedience of Faith and Injury to Science.</head> + +<p> +While all this is true, yet one may not share this conviction, +nor rise to the certainty that there is a supernatural world +whence the Son of God descended to teach man and to found an +infallible Church. Still, to be fair, he must admit that no real +danger to freedom of research and progress of science results +from submission to faith, as shown above. +</p> + +<p> +In the first place it must be admitted that the assertion is still +unproved, that a positive result of research has ever come in +hopeless conflict with a dogma of faith; hence that science +has been prevented from accepting this result. No such case +can be found. The condemnation of the Copernican view +of the world will be considered presently; we pass over the fact +that at the time of its condemnation it was not a positive result +of science: the main point is that the condemnation was not an +irrevocable dogma of faith, but only the decision of a Congregation, +which was withdrawn as soon as the truth was clearly +demonstrated. Besides, science has suffered no injury from that +decision. +</p> + +<p> +In general, where there is real contradiction between science +and faith, the matters in question are invariably <emph>hypotheses</emph>. +Is it more than an hypothesis, and a very doubtful hypothesis +at that, that the world and God are identical, that there +is an eternal, uncreated course of the world, that miracles +are impossible? That what is said about the natural origin of +Christianity, the origin of the Jewish religion from Babylonian +myths, the origin of all religions from fear, fancy, or deception, +is it anything more than hypothetical? The false systems of +knowledge, subjectivism, and agnosticism—are they more than +hypotheses? Ask their originators and champions; they will +admit it themselves; and if they will not admit it, others will +<pb n='114'/><anchor id='Pg114'/> +tell them that their propositions are not only hypotheses, but +often quite untenable. There is hardly a single hypothesis which +has not its vehement opponents. That the serious conflict between +dogma and science is waged only in this field could be +proved by abundant examples. Besides, is it not the philosophical +axiom of modern freedom of thought, that in the +sphere of philosophy and religion there is no certain knowledge, +but only supposition? +</p> + +<p> +Can hypotheses claim to rank as assured results of research +which should be universally accepted? Why should it not be allowed +to contradict them, to oppose them with other suppositions? +Is it not in the interest of science that this be done, that +they be subjected to sharp criticism, lest they gradually be given +out for positive results? Is it not a shameful trifling with the +truth, when a <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> deceives wide circles by pretending that +most frivolous hypotheses are established results of science? +Is it not misleading when modern science treats the rejection of +a supernatural order as an established principle? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +And how often the hypotheses of profane sciences change! <q>Laymen +are astonished,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>H. Poincaré</hi>, <q>that so many scientific theories are +perishable. They see them thrive for a few years, to be abandoned one +after the other; they see wrecks heaped upon wrecks; they foresee that +theories now fashionable will after a short while be forgotten, and they +conclude that these theories are absolute fallacy. They call it the bankruptcy +of science</q> (Wissenschaft u. Hypothese, German by <hi rend='italic'>F. Lindemann</hi>, +2d ed., 1906, 161). The conclusion is certainly unjustified, but +the fact itself remains. Is it then a loss to science when faith opposes +in the field of religion these variations of opinion with fixed dogmas? +</p> + +<p> +Or are these perhaps of less worth, or less certain than their contraries? +Is the dogma of the existence of God of less value than +atheism? Is the conviction of the existence of a world of spirits less +substantial than the philosophy of materialistic monism? Is the doctrine +of the origin of the human soul from the creating hand of God +found inferior to the notion that the soul has developed from the lower +stages of animal life? Should the holy teaching of Christianity, doctrines +believed by the best periods in the world's history, believed in and +professed by minds like those of an <hi rend='italic'>Augustine</hi>, a <hi rend='italic'>Thomas</hi>, and a <hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz</hi>; +doctrines that since their appearance on earth have always attracted +the noble and good, and repelled chiefly the base and immoral; doctrines +that still wait for their first unobjectionable refutation—should such +doctrines be less sure than the innumerable, ever-changing suggestions +of unregulated thought, apparently directed by an aversion to everything +supernatural? +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<pb n='115'/><anchor id='Pg115'/> + +<div> +<head>Erravimus.</head> + +<p> +Yet another fact may be pointed out. It is an undeniable +fact that science, after straying for some time, is not unfrequently +<emph>compelled to return to what is taught by faith +and the Church</emph>, thus confirming the truth of the faith. Frequently +the new theory has come on like a tornado, sweeping all +minds before it. But the tempest was soon spent, the minds +recovered their balance and the hasty misjudgment was +recognized. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Not long ago, when materialism revelled in its orgies, especially in +Germany, when <hi rend='italic'>Vogt</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Buechner</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Moleschott</hi> were writing their +books, and science with <hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond</hi> was hunting <hi rend='italic'>Laplace's</hi> theory +in the evolution of the world, the Syllabus, undaunted, put its anathema +upon the (58.) proposition: <q>No other forces are acknowledged +but those of matter.</q> The summer-night's dream came to an +end, and people rubbed their eyes and saw the reality they had lost a +while. The materialism of the 60's and 70's has been discarded by the +scientific world, and finds a shelter only in the circles of unschooled +infidelity. <hi rend='italic'>J. Reinke</hi>, in the name of biology, bears testimony in the +words: <q>In my opinion materialism has been disposed of in biology; +if, nevertheless, a number of biologists still stand by its colours, this +tenacity may be explained psychologically; for, in the apt words of +<hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond</hi>, in the domain of ideas a man does not willingly and +easily forsake the highway of thought which his entire mental training +has opened up</q> (Einleitung in die theoretische Biologie, 1901, 52). +</p> + +<p> +A few decades ago a number of scientists declared it impossible that +the different races could have descended from one pair of ancestors, as +taught by faith: the difference between the various families being too +great and radical, it was said; the difference being rather of species +than of race. Moreover, there was announced the discovery of people +without religion, without notions of morality and family life; of +tribes incapable of civilization and culture; it was asserted in the +early days of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> enthusiasm that there had been discovered a race +of men that clearly belonged to the species ape. Assertions of this +kind have gradually ceased. Now the different human races are considered +to belong to the same species, and their common parentage is +considered possible from the view-point of the theory of evolution. The +anthropologist <hi rend='italic'>Ranke</hi> expresses his opinion thus: <q>We find the bodily +differences perfectly connected by intermediate forms, graded to a +nicety, and the summary of the differences appears to point to but one +species.... This is the prevalent opinion of all independent research +of anatomically schooled anthropologists</q> (Der Mensch, 2d ed., II, +1894, 261). Ethnology denies the existence of nations or tribes without +religion (<hi rend='italic'>Ratzel</hi>, Voelkerkunde, I, 1885, 31). <hi rend='italic'>Peschel</hi> says: <q>The +statement that any nation or tribe has ever been found anywhere on +<pb n='116'/><anchor id='Pg116'/> +earth without notions and suggestions of religion can be denied emphatically</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>O. Peschel</hi>, Voelkerkunde, 6th ed., 1885, 273). <q>The +more recent ethnology knows of no tribes without morality, nor does +history record any</q> (<hi rend='italic'>W. Schneider</hi>, Die Naturvoelker, 1886, II, 348). +</p> + +<p> +Until a short time ago it was believed that the derivation of man's +life from inferior stages of animal life would not be difficult to prove; +but at present, while many still adhere to the theory that man has developed +from the brute, the conviction is steadily gaining ground that it +cannot be scientifically proved and that it becomes more and more difficult +to disprove man's higher origin. Unable to withstand the force of +facts, one hypothesis gives place to another: what had to be found +could not be found, living or extinct links between the brute and +man refused to appear anywhere, and those which people thought they +had found, turned out to be unsuitable. <hi rend='italic'>Kohlbrugge</hi> concludes his +criticism of the recent theories of the evolution of the body of man +from lower animals with the confession: <q>The above summary is +enough to convince everybody that we do not know anything distinct +about the great problem of evolution; we have not yet seen its face. +All must be done over again</q> (Die Morpholog. Abstammung des +Menschen, 1908, 88). <hi rend='italic'>Virchow</hi> said at the anthropological congress of +Vienna, 1889: <q>When we met at Innsbruck twenty years ago Darwinism +had just finished its first triumphal march through the world, +and my friend <hi rend='italic'>Vogt</hi> became its ardent champion. We have searched in +vain for the missing link connecting man directly with the ape.</q> +</p> + +<p> +What has become of those anatomic-morphologic links between man +and beast, the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>pithecanthropus erectus</foreign>, the man dug out at Neandertal, +Spy, Schipka, La Naulette, and Krapina, and shown with great +confidence to the world? What has become of the prehistoric man, said +to belong to the glacial period of Europe, and to have ranked far below +the present man? <hi rend='italic'>J. Kohlmann</hi> writes: <q>I wish to state that I thoroughly +adhere to the theory of evolution, but my own experience has +led me to the result that man has not changed his racial characteristics +since the glacial period. He appears on the soil of Europe physically +complete, and there is no ape-man to be found</q> (apud <hi rend='italic'>Ranke</hi>, Ibid. +480). Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Branco</hi>, director of the Palæontological Institute of Berlin, +says: <q>Palæontology tells us nothing about the missing link. This +science knows of no ancestors of man</q> (at the 5th international Zoological +Congress, 1901, <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi>, Die mod. Biolog. 3, p. 488). And +the palæontologist <hi rend='italic'>Zittel</hi> says: <q>The missing link between man and ape, +though a postulate of the theory of evolution, has not been found</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Ranke</hi>, l. c. 504). <hi rend='italic'>E. Grosse</hi> concludes his studies on evolution with +the significant words: <q>I began this book with the intention of writing +a history of the evolution of the family, and I finish it convinced +that at present the writing of that history is impossible for me or for +anybody else</q> (Die Formen der Familie, 1896, Vorwort). <hi rend='italic'>Ranke</hi> is +perfectly right in saying that <q>it behoves the dignity of science to +confess that it knows nothing of the origin of man</q> (Thuermer V, 1902, +I. Heft). +</p> + +<p> +A century ago or so, ridicule was heaped in the name of science on +the description in the Bible of the last day: <q>The stars shall fall,</q> +<q>and the powers of heaven shall be moved,</q> <q>the elements shall be +<pb n='117'/><anchor id='Pg117'/> +melted with heat, and the earth shall be burnt up</q> (Matt. xxiv. 29 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>; +Luke xxi. 25 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>; Mark xiii. 24 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>; 2 Pet. iii. 10). Then the assertion +that stones could fall from the skies caused a smile, but now science +has come to the general knowledge that this is not only possible, but +perhaps really will be the end of all things, if once our earth on its +journey through unknown spaces of the universe should collide with a +comet or get into a cosmic cloud of large meteors. (Cf. the graphic description +in <hi rend='italic'>K. Braun</hi>, Ueber Kosmogonie, 3d ed., 1905, p. 381 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>) +</p> + +<p> +An example of another kind: It is not so long since Protestant, +liberal Bible-criticism and its history of early Christian literature, +in the endeavour to remove everything supernatural from the beginning +of Christianity, regarded the New Testament and the oldest Christian +documents as unreliable testimony, even forgeries, and for this reason +placed the date of their origin as late as possible. But now they have +to retrace their steps. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>A. Harnack</hi> writes: <q>There was a period—the general public is still +living in it—when the New Testament and the oldest Christian literature +were thought to be but a tissue of lies and forgeries. This time has +passed. For science it was an episode in which much was learned of +which much must be forgotten. The result of subsequent research over-reaches +in a <q>reactionary</q> effect what might be termed the central position +of modern criticism. The oldest literature of the Church is in the +main and in most details true and reliable, that is, from the literary +and historical point of view.... I am not afraid to use the word <q>retrogressive</q>—for +we should call a spade a spade—the criticism of the +sources of the earliest Christianity is beyond doubt moving retrogressively +towards tradition</q> (Chronologie der Alt-Christ. Literatur I, +1897, VIII). In a more recent work the same savant writes: <q>During +the years from 30 to 70 all originated in Palestine, or, better, in Jerusalem, +what later on was developed. This knowledge is steadily gaining +and replacing the former <q>critical</q> opinion that the fundamental +development had extended over a period of about a hundred years</q> +(Lukas der Arzt, 1906, Vorwort). This retrogression is continued +still farther in his later work, <q>Neue Untersuchungen zur Apostolgesch. +u. zur Abfassungszeit der synopt. Evang., 1911,</q> in which <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> draws +very near to the Catholic view regarding the date of writing of the +Acts of the Apostles, as also regarding <hi rend='italic'>St. Paul's</hi> attitude towards Judaism +and Christian-Judaism, and departs from the modern Protestant +view (cf. pp. 28-47, 79 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>, 86, 93 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). <q>Protestant authorities on +church-history,</q> he says elsewhere, <q>no longer take offence at the proposition +that the main elements of Catholicism go back to the Apostolic +era, and not only peripherically</q> (Theol. Literar. Zeitung, 1905, 52). +</p> + +<p> +In a speech, much commented on, which he made at his university +January 12, 1907, Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>, discussing the religious question in +Germany, called attention to the fact that there has been quite a +marked return to the Catholic standpoint: <q>From the study of Church +history we find that we all have become different from what our fathers +were, whether we may like it or not. Study has shown that we are +separated from our fathers by a long course of development; that we +do not understand their ideas and words at all, much less do we use +them in the sense they used them.</q> He then draws out the comparison +<pb n='118'/><anchor id='Pg118'/> +more particularly: <q><hi rend='italic'>Flacius</hi> and the older Protestants denied +that <hi rend='italic'>Peter</hi> had ever been in Rome at all. Now we know that his having +been there is a fact well evidenced in history.</q> The motto of the older +Protestants was that the Scriptures are the sole source of revelation. +<q>But now, and for a long time past, Protestant savants have realized +that the Scriptures could not be separated from tradition, and that the +collecting of the New Testament Scriptures was a part of tradition.</q> +<q>Protestants of the sixteenth century taught justification by faith alone, +without works. In the absence of confessional controversy, no evangelical +Christian would now find fault with the teaching which declares +only such faith to be of any worth which shows itself by the love of +God and of the neighbour</q> (Protestantismus u. Katholizismus in +Deutschland, Preussisch. Jahrbücher 127. Bd., 1907, 301 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Many similar instances of science confessing Erravimus in +regard to the Christian or Catholic position could be cited. +They are an admonition to be modest, not to overrate the value +of a scientific proposition, and not, with supreme confidence and +infallibility, to brand it as an offence against the human intellect +to let one's self be guided by the principles of faith. +</p> + +<p> +Moreover, it has often happened that science emphatically +and sneeringly rejected propositions, and called them false +and absurd, which to-day are considered elementary. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, in 1687, had correctly explained the revolution of +the moon around the earth, and of the planets around the sun, +as the co-operation of gravitation and inertia, and thence concluded +also the elliptic form of the orbits of planets previously +discovered by <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>. <hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz</hi> rejected this theory, +<hi rend='italic'>Huygens</hi> called it absurd, and the Academy of Paris as late as +1730 still favoured the theory of revolution of <hi rend='italic'>Descartes</hi>; it +was only about the year 1740 that it was generally accepted. +<hi rend='italic'>Huygens</hi>, himself, had formed in 1690 his theory about light-waves. +For a long time it was misunderstood. Only in 1800, +or somewhat later, it received its merited acknowledgment, but +noted physicists like <hi rend='italic'>Biot</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Brewster</hi> rejected it still for some +time and held to the theory of emission. <q>Even in the intellectual +world the law of inertia holds good</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Rosenberger</hi>, Gesch. +der Physik, III, 1887, 139). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The great discoverer <hi rend='italic'>Galvani</hi> complained of being attacked from two +opposite sides, by the scientists and by the ignorant: <q>Both make fun +of me. They call me the dancing master of frogs. Yet I know I have +discovered one of the greatest forces of nature.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='119'/><anchor id='Pg119'/> + +<p> +When <hi rend='italic'>Benjamin Franklin</hi> explained the lightning-rod to the +Royal Academy of Sciences, he was ridiculed as a dreamer. The +same happened to <hi rend='italic'>Young</hi> with his theory of the undulation of +light. <q>The Edinburgh Review</q> proposed to the public to put +<hi rend='italic'>Thomas Grey</hi> in a strait-jacket when he presented his plan +for railroads. Sir <hi rend='italic'>Humphry Davy</hi> laughed at the idea of illuminating +the city of London by gas. The French Academy of +Sciences actually sneered at the physicist <hi rend='italic'>Arago</hi> when he proposed +a resolution to merely open a discussion of the idea of +an electric telegraph (<hi rend='italic'>Wallace</hi>, Die wissensch. Ansicht des +Uebernatuerlichen, 102 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Until about a hundred years ago scientists almost universally +thought it impossible for a stone to fall from the skies—not to mention +a rain of stones. Of the big meteor that fell at Agram in 1751 +the learned Vienna professor, <hi rend='italic'>Stuetz</hi>, wrote in 1790 as follows: <q>That +iron had fallen from the skies may have been believed in Germany in +1751 even by its enlightened minds, owing to the uncertainty then +prevailing in regard to physics and natural history. In our times, +however, it were unpardonable to consider similar fairy tales even probable.</q> +Some museums threw away their collections of meteors, fearing +they would appear ridiculous by keeping them. In that very year, +1790, a meteor fell near the city of Juillac in France, and the mayor of +the town sent a report of it to the French Academy of Sciences, signed +by three hundred eye-witnesses. But the wise men of the academy knew +better. Referee <hi rend='italic'>Bertholon</hi> said: <q>It is a pity for a town to have so +foolish a mayor,</q> and added: <q>It is sad to see the whole municipality +certifying by affidavit to a folk-saga that can only be pitied. What more +can I say of an affidavit like that? Comment is self-evident to a +philosophically trained mind who reads this authentic testimonial about +an evidently false fact, about a physically impossible phenomenon.</q> +<hi rend='italic'>A. Deluc</hi>, in other respects a sober-minded man, and a scientist, even +remarked that should a stone like that fall before his feet, then he +would have to admit that he had seen it, but nevertheless would not believe +it. <hi rend='italic'>Vaudin</hi> remarked: <q>Better to deny such incredible things +than to have to try to explain them.</q> Thus taught the French Academy +of that time (apud <hi rend='italic'>Braun</hi>, Ueber Kosmogonie, 3d ed., 1905, 378 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +And now science is teaching the contrary. Everybody knows that such +falling meteors are not only possible, but that they fall about seven +hundred times a year on our earth. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Do not these examples bear a striking resemblance to the attitude +of many of the representatives of modern science towards +facts and truths of our faith? +</p> + +<p> +This has not been said with a view of detracting from the +<pb n='120'/><anchor id='Pg120'/> +reputation of science. Not at all. It has fallen to the lot of +man to be subject to error. The above was said to recall that +fact. Science is not so infallible as to be able to claim the +right to ignore, in religious and ethical questions, faith and the +Church, and even to usurp the place of the faith given by God, +in order to lead its disciples upon the new paths of a delivered +mankind. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='121'/><anchor id='Pg121'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter III. Unprepossession Of Research.</head> + +<div> +<head>What It Is.</head> + +<p> +In the year 1901 a case, insignificant in itself, caused great +excitement in and even beyond the scientific world. What had +happened? At the University of Strassburg, in a territory for +the most part Catholic, no less than one-third of the students +were Catholic, yet of the seventy-two professors sixty-one +were Protestant, six Israelites and but four Catholics (according +to the report of the Secretary of State, <hi rend='italic'>Koeller</hi>, in the +115th session of the Reichstag, January 11, 1901). The government +resolved, in view of the state of affairs, to give more consideration, +when appointing professors, to the Catholic members +of the university. Even the non-Catholic members of the +Bundesrat desired it. A vacancy occurring in the faculty of +history, the government, besides appointing the Protestant professor +proposed by the faculty of philosophy, decided to create a +new chair to be filled by a Catholic. +</p> + +<p> +The appointment of a Catholic professor of history was regarded +as seriously endangering science. The storm broke. The +venerable historian, <hi rend='italic'>Th. Mommsen</hi>, who had been a champion +of liberty in the revolution of 1848, promptly gave the alarm. +In the Munich <q>Neueste Nachrichten</q> there appeared over his +signature an article that created a general sensation. <q>German +university circles,</q> he said, in his solemn protest, <q>are pervaded +by a feeling of degradation. Our vital nerve is unprejudiced +research; research that does not find what it seeks +and expects to find, owing to purposes, considerations, and +restraints that serve other, practical ends extraneous to science—but +finds what logically and historically appears to the conscientious +scientist the right thing, truthfulness. The appointment +of a college teacher whose freedom is restricted by barriers +<pb n='122'/><anchor id='Pg122'/> +is laying the axe to the root of German science. The call +to a chair of history, or philosophy, of one who must be a Catholic +or a Protestant, and who must serve this or that confession, +is tantamount to compelling him to set bounds to his work +whenever the results might be awkward for a religious dogma.</q> +And he concludes with a ringing appeal for the solidarity +of the representatives of science: <q>Perhaps I am not deceived +in the hope of having given expression to the sentiments +of our colleagues.</q> This statement of the famous scientist, +conceived in the temper of his days of '48, was soon softened, +if not neutralized, by a subsequent statement from his pen. But +the spark had already started the fire. From most universities +there came letters of approval and praise of his courageous +stand, in behalf of the honour of the universities and of German +science. On the other hand, some gave vent to their regret +of his hot-spurred action. Since then the song of unprejudiced +science has been sung in countless variations and keys, ending +as a rule with the chorus: Hence the believing, especially +Catholics, cannot be true scientists. For this was the central idea +of <hi rend='italic'>Mommsen's</hi> protest, and in that sense it had been understood. +</p> + +<p> +For the sake of clearness we shall condense the substance of +the thought into a brief form: The vital nerve of science, the +condition under which alone it can exist, is unprepossession, +that is, a straightforward honesty that knows of no +other consideration than to aim at the truth for its own sake. +The believer, the Catholic, cannot be unprepossessed, because +he must pay regard to dogmas and Church-doctrine and precept. +Therefore he is wanting in the most essential requisite +of true science. Hence college professors of a Catholic conviction +are anomalous: they have no right to claim a chair +in the home of unprepossessed science. For reasons of expediency +it may be advisable to appoint some of them, but they +cannot be regarded as sterling scientists. Catholic theology, +building upon faith, is not science in the true sense of the word, +and deserves no place in a university. A Catholic university, a +home of scientific research built upon a Catholic foundation, is +something like a squared circle. It may be that Catholic +scientists, too, have their achievements, but they cannot be +<pb n='123'/><anchor id='Pg123'/> +expected to be possessed of that unflinching pursuit of the +truth which must be part of the man of science. +</p> + +<p> +These are thoughts which have petrified in the minds of many +into self-evident principles, with all the obstinacy of intolerance. +It is not difficult to recognize in it the old reproach we +have already dealt with, it is here in a slightly different form. +The believing scientist is not free to search for the truth, being +tied down by his duty to believe. Science, however, must be +free. Hence the believer cannot properly pursue science. +</p> + +<p> +Freedom of science and science unprepossessed are related +terms and are often used synonymously. Therefore, in putting +the probe to the often-repeated demand for unprepossession, we +shall meet with ideas similar to those we have already discussed, +only in a slightly different shape. +</p> + +<p> +What, then, is that unprepossession which science must avow? +Can the Catholic, the believing scientist, possess it? Unprepossessed +research—<q>I don't like the expression,</q> says a representative +of free-thought, <q>because it is a product of that +shortcoming which has already done great damage to free-thought +in its struggle with the powers of the past</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>). +Hence we have reason to fear that the confidence with which +this word is used is greater than the clearness of thought it +represents. +</p> + +<p> +What is meant by saying that science must be <emph>unprepossessed</emph>? +Undoubtedly it means that science should make no +presuppositions, it must enter upon its work free from prejudice +and presumption. And what is presumption? Evidently +something presumed, upon which the research is to rest the level +and rule of its direction: the supposition being taken for +granted, without express proof. What I have expressly proved +in my process of thought is no longer a supposition to the +structure of thought, but a part of that structure. +</p> + +<p> +Is the scientist, however, to allow no presumption at all? +That would be impossible. When making his calculations the +mathematician presupposes the correctness of the multiplication +table. Or is he first to prove that twice three are six? He could +not do it, because it is immediately self-evident. In his +optical experiments in the laboratory, in drawing inferences as +<pb n='124'/><anchor id='Pg124'/> +to the nature of light from different indications, the physicist +presupposes that senses are able to observe the facts correctly, +that everything has its respective reason, that nothing +can be and not be, at the same time, under the same conditions. +Can he or must he try first to prove it? He must presume it +because it is beyond a doubt, and because it cannot be proved at +all, at least all of it cannot. The astronomer, too, makes unhesitating +use of the formulas of mathematics without examining +them anew; every natural scientist calmly presupposes +the correctness of the results established by his predecessors and +goes on building upon those results: he may do so because he +cannot with reason doubt them. Hence presumptions are common; +they may be made when we are convinced of their truth; +they must be made because not everything can be proved. Much +cannot be proved because it is immediately self-evident, as, for +instance, the ability to recognize the true or the elementary +principles of reasoning; many other things cannot always be +proved minutely, because not every scientist cares to begin with +the egg of Leda. He that wants to build a house builds upon +a given base; if he will not accept it, if he desires to dig up +the fundament to the very bottom, in order to lay it anew, he will +be digging forever, but the house will never be built. +</p> + +<p> +Hence to say that science must be unprepossessed cannot +mean that it must not make any presupposition. What, therefore, +does it mean? Simply this: <emph>Science must not presume +anything to be true which is false, nor anything as +proved which is still uncertain and unproved</emph>. Whatever +the scientist knows to be certain he may take as such, presuming +it as the foundation and direction of further work; and what he +knows to be probable he may suppose to be probable. +</p> + +<p> +In so doing he in no way offends against the ideal that should +be ever-present to his mind—the truth, because he merely +allows himself to be guided by the truth, recognized as such. +And the sequence of truth cannot but be truth, the sequence of +certainty cannot but be certainty. But should he presuppose +to be true what is false and unproved, and the uncertain to be +certain, then he would offend against truth, against the aim of +every science. +</p> + +<pb n='125'/><anchor id='Pg125'/> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Hence if the critic of the Bible presupposes miracles and prophecies to +be impossible, inferring therefrom that many narratives in Holy Writ +cannot be authentic, but must be legends of a later period, he is making +arbitrary presuppositions, he is not an unprepossessed scientist. Likewise, +if an historian presupposing God's supernatural providence over +the world to be impossible, and, in building upon this basis, comes to the +conclusion that the Christian religion grew from purely natural factors, +from Oriental notions and myths, from Greek philosophy and +Roman forms of government, he again makes unproved suppositions. +If the natural philosopher assumes that there cannot be a personal +Creator, and infers from it that the world is of itself and eternal, he +has forfeited the claim of being an unprepossessed scientist, and by +making in any way his own pet ideas the basis of his research he is +violating the demands of unprepossession; the results he arrives at are +not scientific results, but the speculations of an amateur. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Unprepossession and Religious Conviction.</head> + +<p> +Is it possible for the Christian scientist who adheres to his +faith, to be unprepossessed, as demanded by science? According +to all that has been said hitherto about the relation of +science to faith, the answer can be only in the affirmative. The +believing Christian and Catholic looks upon the doctrines of +faith taught him by revelation and the Church as an <emph>established +truth</emph>. What to me is true and certain I can take for the true +and certain basis and standard of my thought. This is demanded +by unprepossession—nothing more. +</p> + +<p> +Considering the immense extent of the sciences, the profane +sciences will but seldom, and in but few matters, have occasion +to presuppose truths of faith in the above-mentioned way; and +only in a negative form at that. We have previously shown +that the profane sciences must never take truths of faith for a +positive basis to build upon; they must regard the doctrines of +revelation only in so far as it is not allowed to teach anything +in contradiction to them. And with this demand they will meet +in rare instances only, because, if not overstepping their province, +they will very seldom come in touch with faith (cf. pp. 88-96). +When <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> was studying his planetary orbits, and <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> +discovered the law of gravitation, both worked independent of +the Christian view of the world which they both professed; +it was in no way a necessary presupposition to their research. +When <hi rend='italic'>Scheiner</hi> discovered the sun-spots, and <hi rend='italic'>Secchi</hi> classified +<pb n='126'/><anchor id='Pg126'/> +the spectra of the stars, they were not doing so as Jesuits nor +as Catholics; as Mohammedans or atheists they might have +made the same discoveries. Steam engines and railways, <hi rend='italic'>Volta's</hi> +electricity, cathode-rays and X-rays, all discoveries that +the nineteenth century can boast of, do not depend directly on +any special view of the world. +</p> + +<p> +And if the believing scientist does take his faith for a guide +in some matters, when in all his researches in the history +of the Christian religion and the Church he presupposes that +God's miraculous interference is not impossible, because the +contrary would offend not only against his faith, but also against +his common sense; when in pondering the ultimate reasons of all +things he allows himself to be influenced by the idea that atheism +is false, or at least not proved—for that there is a God both +his faith and his reason tell him—then these presumptions +are by no means inadmissible. The naturalist, too, presupposing +certain results of science to be true, takes care not +to get into conflict with them, and he will soon correct himself +should he arrive at different results. If a mathematician +should arrive at results conflicting with other proved results, +he would infer therefrom that his calculation was faulty; why, +then, cannot the Christian now and then be led by the truths +of his faith, of which he is certain, without by doing so offending +against the spirit of scientific truthfulness? +</p> + +<p> +Or may he not do so just because they are <emph>religious</emph> truths, +vouched for by a supernatural authority? As a fact many of +them are established also by the testimony of reason. This is +shown by the examples just mentioned. However, the question +is not how a truth is vouched for, but whether it be a truth or +not. If the scientist is assured that something is unquestionably +true, then he owes it to the spirit of truthfulness to accept +it. In doing so he will in no way be unfaithful to his scientific +method; the truths of faith are to him not a source of +proofs for the results of his profane science, but only hints, calling +his attention to the fact that certain propositions are not +proved, that they are even false. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Much less is in historical questions the Catholic obliged to defend or +praise everything of advantage to his Church, whether true or not. Hence +<pb n='127'/><anchor id='Pg127'/> +<hi rend='italic'>Mommsen</hi> is grossly mistaken when he states in his letter of protest +mentioned above: <q>The appointment of a historian or philosopher, who +must be a Catholic or a Protestant and who must serve his confession, +evidently means nothing else but to prohibit the Protestant historian +from presenting the powerful mental structure of the papacy in its full +light, and the Catholic historian from appreciating the profound thought +and the tremendous importance of heresy and Protestantism.</q> The +Catholic is only bound to the truth. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Or are the Christian truths of faith perhaps regrettable +errors, hence presumptions that should not be made? If so, +demonstrate it. Hitherto such demonstration has not succeeded. +So long as the creed of the believing Christian cannot +be refuted convincingly, he has the right to cling to it in the +name of truth. +</p> + +<p> +Or can we not have reasonable certainty at all in religious +matters? Are they the undemonstrable things of an uncontrollable +sentiment? To be sure, this is asserted often enough, +explicitly or by insinuation. If this were true, then of course +duty of faith and true unprepossession could not go together; +one would be regarding as the truth things of which one cannot +be convinced. But this is also an unproved assumption: it +is the duality of subjectivism and agnosticism, the fundamental +presumption of liberal freedom of science, which we have already +sufficiently exposed. +</p> + +<p> +However, let us assume again the position of those who do +not feel themselves personally convinced of the truth of the +Christian dogmatic faith, or of the Catholic Church. But the +Catholic is <emph>firmly convinced</emph> thereof and, if need be, will +make sacrifices for this conviction, as millions have done. +Hence, can any one forbid him to think and judge according +to his conviction? Would they who differ from his opinion for +this very reason force him to think against his own conviction? +Would not that indeed be <q>seduction to sin against +the Holy Ghost</q>? If the jurist or historian has formed the +conviction that <hi rend='italic'>Mommsen</hi> is on historical questions concerning +Roman law an authority, who may be followed without scruple, +and he does so without re-examining the particular points, will +this be looked upon as an offence against unprepossession? If, +then, the Catholic is certain that he may safely trust to revelation +<pb n='128'/><anchor id='Pg128'/> +and the Church—and there is no authority on earth of more +venerable standing, even if viewed from a purely natural point—will +he alone be accused of mental blindness and lack of +freedom? +</p> + +<p> +Or may the scientist have <emph>no view of the world</emph> at all, +because he might be influenced thereby in certain directions? +The champions of this demand will surely not admit that they +have not a definite view of the world. By no means! We know +very well that just those who are most vehement in urging +unprepossessed science have a very pronounced notion of the +world, we know also that they are resolutely propagating that +notion. Yet nothing is said against a scientist who is a +monist, or who starts from agnosticism. It seems they intend +to exclude one view only, the positive religious view. Yet not +even this one wholly. No one finds the Jew who adheres to his +religion unfit for scientific research. Of course not. Protestants, +too, find favour: according to the statutes of some German +universities Protestants only may be professors there. +Neither <hi rend='italic'>Mommsen</hi> nor any other herald of unprepossession deems +it necessary to defend science against these institutions and +usages. It is plain what is meant by the popular cry for science +unprepossessed: The man of science may be anything, +sceptic or atheist, pagan or Hottentot, only he must not be a +faithful Catholic. Is this fair? Is this the spirit of truth and +justice with which they claim to be filled? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +What has just been said about the Catholic being excluded, could +easily be exemplified by a lengthy list of facts. But we shall pass +them over. We shall note one utterance only, from the pen of a non-Catholic +writer. The renowned pedagogue, <hi rend='italic'>Fr. W. Foerster</hi>, says in the +preface to the second edition of his book on <q>Sexual Ethics and Sexual +Pedagogy</q>: <q>Special exception has been taken to the catholicizing tendency +of my book, and not infrequently the author has without further +ado been made out an orthodox Catholic. For many years past I +have been in a position to gain interesting information concerning the +incredible bias of many champions of unprepossessed research. To +them it is an a-priori dogma that everything represented by the Catholic +Church is nonsense, superstition, bigotry. They are past comprehending +how an unprejudiced man, simply by concrete experience, unprepossessed +research and serious pondering in the field of pedagogy, +could be brought to affirm that certain notions of the Roman Catholic +Church are the unavoidable consequence of a penetrating knowledge +<pb n='129'/><anchor id='Pg129'/> +of soul and life. This cannot be admitted by the non-Catholic: for him +the truth must cease where the Catholic faith begins; he dares not +assent to anything, else he will no longer be taken for a reputable scientific +man.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The bluster about unprepossession proceeds from <emph>shallowness +and dishonesty</emph>. The most varied presumptions, that +have nothing to do with science and the pursuit of the truth, +may pass without notice; only when Christian and Catholic +religious convictions, resting upon divine authority, are encountered, +then tolerance gives way to excitement, a hue and cry is +raised, the gate is shut, and entrance to the scientific world +denied. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Philosophers arise, and each philosophizes according to his manner. +<hi rend='italic'>Fichte</hi> says: <q>What philosophy to choose depends on the kind of a +man one is.</q> The historian enters. It is reported that <hi rend='italic'>Treitschke</hi> said: +<q>If I cannot write history from my own view-point, with my own judgment, +then I had rather be a soapmaker.</q> According to trustworthy +testimony, the well-known Protestant historian, <hi rend='italic'>Giesebrecht</hi>, used to +preface his lectures in Munich with the words: <q>I am a Prussian and +a Protestant: I shall lecture accordingly</q> (Hochschulnachrichten, +1901, 2, p. 30). Even here there are no objections in the name of Unprepossession. +<q>Science,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>, <q>will tear off the mask of the +hypocrite or plagiarist and throw him out of the temple, but the queerest +suppositions it must let pass if they go by the name of convictions, +and if those who harbour them are trying to demonstrate them by scientific +means.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Therefore the convictions, or, to speak with <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>, the <q>prejudices,</q> +of the Catholic <q>certainly deserve as much consideration and patience +as the velleities, idiosyncrasies, and blind dogmas which we have +to meet and refute in the struggle between intellects</q> (Internationale +Wochenschrift, 1908, 259 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). <q>Science has been restricted,</q> the same +authority also admits, <q>at all times; our progeny will find even modern +science in many ways not ruled by pure reason only</q> (Dogmengesch. +III, 3d ed., 1907, 326). +</p> + +<p> +And what is to be said of those more serious suppositions, unproved +and unprovable, which guide modern science wherever it meets philosophical-religious +questions? That truly dogmatic rejection of everything +supernatural and transcendental, that obstinate ignoration of a +personal God, the rejection of any creative act, of any miracle, of any +revelation,—a presupposition directly raised to a scientific principle: +the principle of causality. Later on we shall make an excursion into +various fields of science, and we shall show clearly how this presumption +is stamped upon entire branches of science. Those solemn assurances +of persevering unselfishness in desiring nothing but the truth; the +confidence with which they claim a monopoly of the instinct for the +truth, all this will appear in quite a strange light, the twilight of dishonesty, +<pb n='130'/><anchor id='Pg130'/> +when we examine the documents and records of liberal science +itself. We shall see sufficiently how truthful the self-confession of +a modern champion of liberal science really is: <q>The recently coined +expression, <q>science unprepossessed,</q> I do not like, because it is a product +of that shortcoming which has already done so much damage to free +thought in its struggle with the powers of the past—because that word +is not entirely honest. None of us sits down to his work unprepossessed</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>F. Jodl</hi>, Neue Freie Presse, November 26, 1907). Here we +shall touch upon only one more question. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Duty to Believe and Scientific Demonstration.</head> + +<p> +But cannot the believing Christian submit to scientific investigation +the doctrine of faith itself, which he must without +doubt hold to be true? This must surely be allowed if he is +to convince himself scientifically of the truth of it. Indeed, +this is allowed. He may critically examine everything to the +very bottom, even the existence of God, the rationality of his +own mind. But how can he, if no doubt is permissible? To examine +means to search doubtingly; it means to call the matter +in question—this, too, is right. It is, on the one hand, a doctrine +of the Catholic Church that they who have received faith +through the ministry of the Church, that is, they that have been +made familiar with the essential subjects of the faith and the +motives of their credibility by proper religious instruction, must +not doubt their faith. They have no reasonable excuse for +doubting because they are assured of the truth of the faith. +We have discussed this point before.<note place='foot'><q>They that have received the faith through the ministry of the +Church can never have just cause for changing their faith or calling it +into doubt</q> (Sess. III, ch. 3). The Vatican Council did not thereby +mean to say that an exceptional case could not happen where some one, +without fault of his own, might fall away from his faith, either on account +of insufficient religious instruction, or of natural dullness or exceptional +misfortunes in the circumstances of life in which he may be placed. +The theologians who worded the decision also say that the Council did +not intend to condemn the opinion expressed by many older theologians, +that under certain conditions an uneducated Catholic might be led in +such way into error as to join another faith without committing a sin. +(cf. <hi rend='italic'>Granderath</hi>, Const. Dog. ss. oec. Concl. Vat. 69).</note> +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +As a matter of course only voluntary doubts are excluded, doubts by +which one assents deliberately and wilfully to the judgment that perhaps +not all may be true that is proposed for our belief. Involuntary +<pb n='131'/><anchor id='Pg131'/> +doubts are neither excluded nor sinful. These are apparent counter-arguments, +objections, difficulties against the faith, which occur to the +mind without getting its conscious approval. They are not unlikely, +because the cognition of the credibility of Christian truths, while it is +certain, is yet lacking in that obvious clearness which would render +obscurity and counter-argument impossible; the assent to faith is free. +Doubts of this kind are apt to molest the mind and buzz round it like +bothersome insects, but they are not sinful because they do not set aside +the assent to faith any more than the cloud that intervenes between +us and the sun can extinguish its light. The assent to faith is withdrawn +only when the will with clear consideration approves of the judgment +that the doubt may be right. +</p> + +<p> +But what about doubts which one cannot solve? Would we not owe +it to truth and probity to withhold assent to faith for a while? +</p> + +<p> +The answer lies in the distinction of a twofold solution of difficulties. +It is by no means necessary, nor even possible, to solve directly all +objections; it suffices to solve them indirectly, that is, by recognizing +them as void; since faith is certain, whatever is contrary to it must be +false. If one is convinced by clear proofs of the innocence of a defendant +he will not be swayed in his assurance, no matter how much circumstantial +evidence be offered against the defendant. He may not be able +to account directly for one or the other remarkable coincidence of circumstances, +but all the arguments of the other side are to him refuted, +because to him the defendant's innocence is a certainty. Thus the faithful +Christian may hear it solemnly proclaimed as a scientifically established +fact that miracles are impossible, because they would be tantamount +to God making correction on His own work, because they would +imply a self-contradiction, or they would be against the law of preservation +of energy; he hears of atrocities in the history of the Church, +of the Inquisition, of the Church being an enemy of civilization—he +knows not what to say: but one thing he knows, that there must be an +answer, because he knows, enlightened by faith, that his belief cannot be +false. Nowhere is it demanded that all objections be directly answered, +in order that the conviction be true. If I, with the whole world, am convinced +that I am able to recognize the truth, must I therefore carefully +disentangle all the cobwebs ever spun about the truth by brooding philosophical +brains? If I am in the house, safe from the rain, must I, in +order to keep dry, go out and catch every drop of rain that is falling? +Such doubts may indeed harass the untrained mind, may even confuse it. +This is the juncture where grace comes in, the pledge of which has been +received at baptism, bringing enlightenment, peace, assurance; then we +learn from others and from ourselves that faith is also a grace. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Nevertheless a scientific examination of the foundations and +truths of faith is allowed and wholesome. Nearly all the theological +works written by Catholics since the days of <hi rend='italic'>Justin</hi> and +<hi rend='italic'>Augustine</hi> are nothing but examinations of this kind. At every +examination one proceeds with doubt and question. This is +<pb n='132'/><anchor id='Pg132'/> +admitted; but this doubt must be merely a methodical one, +not a serious one, nor need it be serious. These two kinds +of doubt must be clearly distinguished. In case of a serious +doubt I look upon the matter as really dubious, and withhold +my assent. I am not yet convinced of its truth. This kind of +a doubt is not allowed in matters of faith and it is the only one +that is forbidden. In case of a methodical doubt I proceed as +convinced of a truth, but I do not yet see the reasons plainly, +and would like to be fully conscious of them. Evidently there +is no need of casting aside the convictions I have hitherto held, +and of beginning to think that the matter is by no means +positively established. +</p> + +<p> +For instance, I am convinced that a complicated order must +be the work of intellect; however, I would like to find the +proof of it. Hence I proceed as if the truth were yet to be +found. But it would evidently be absurd to think in the meantime +that such admirable order could be the result of blind accident. +Or, I am convinced that there must be a source for +every event: I desire to find the demonstration of it. In the +meantime shall I think it possible for another Nova Persei to +be produced in the sky without any cause? Or, investigating to +see whether I am capable of recognizing the truth, shall I +seriously become a sceptic till I am convinced that I ought not +to be such? As soon as I really doubt that I can recognize anything +at all as true, obviously I cannot proceed any further. +<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> begins his <q>Critique of Pure Reason</q> with this doubt, +and many imitate him, but only by evident inconsistency are they +able to continue their researches by means of reason. Scientific +examination does not consist in repudiating a certainty held hitherto, +in order to arrive at it anew; it consists in bringing to +one's clear consciousness the reasons for that certainty, and in +trying to formulate those reasons precisely. To investigate the +light it is evidently not necessary first to extinguish it. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the believing Christian may most certainly probe into +his religious conviction without interfering with his adherence, +and by doing so proceed unprepossessed in the fullest sense, +for unprepossession does not mean the rooting up of all certainty. +At the threshold of wisdom does not sit Scepticism. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='133'/><anchor id='Pg133'/> + +<div> +<head>What Unprepossession is Not.</head> + +<p> +But the deeper, modern meaning of unprepossession is precisely +the right to doubt seriously everything, especially the +truths of the Christian faith; this is the freedom demanded. +Scepticism, the stamp of our time. +</p> + +<p> +Many a misconception may have contributed to the definition +of this unprepossession. For instance, overlooking the +important difference between methodical doubt and serious +doubt. +</p> + +<p> +Then there is the erroneous opinion that we should and +could proceed everywhere in the same way as in the natural +sciences. Almost parallel with the progress in the natural +sciences grew the doubt of the correctness of the ancient physical +and astronomical notion of the world; piece after piece +crumbled away under the hand of research; new truths were +discovered. In just admiration of these results it was concluded +that all provinces of human cognition should be <q>researched</q> +in the same way, not excepting religion and theories +of the world; here, too, science should cast a radical doubt upon +everything and discover truth—as if here we had to deal with +matters similar to astronomy and physics, in the state they +were centuries ago; as if all mankind was still ignorant of the +truth and science had to discover it. +</p> + +<p> +This right to doubt is claimed especially in the higher +questions of religion. Certain cognition by reason is, after all, +impossible here, such is the presumption, and therefore, first +of all, it is the right and duty of man, as soon as he has +attained his intellectual maturity, to shape by doubt his views +of the world to the satisfaction of his mind and heart, to win +them by a struggle; nor is this true only in the case of the +single individual, but also of entire generations. To see problems +everywhere, not to have any convictions, this is taken +to be true unprepossession. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Man must learn,</q> so we are told, <q>that there is no absolute miracle, +not even in the domain of the religious life, which supernaturally offers +truth at a point or by an institution, but that every man and every era as +witnessed by the authority of history must conquer truth by themselves +<pb n='134'/><anchor id='Pg134'/> +for their own sake and at their own risk</q> (<hi rend='italic'>E. Troeltsch</hi>, Internationale +Wochensch. 1908, 26). Thus the mind of man cannot slake its thirst +for positive truth at the divine fountain of revelation, but only by search +and research. Such is the cheerful message of this science. <q>Amid grave +crises,</q> we are told again, <q>a new concept of science has forced its way +to the front since the beginning of the eighteenth century and conquered +the universities.</q> <q>Science is not a finished system, but a research +to be forever under examination</q> (<hi rend='italic'>A. Harnack</hi>, Die Aufgabe der theol. +Facultaeten, 1901, 17). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Research without ever arriving at the sure possession of the +truth, this is now the meaning of science, especially of philosophy. +Hence there cannot be a philosophy conclusive and +immutable, and any point which seems established may at any +time be revised according to new perceptions. <q>There is no +question that may not be asked; none which in the abstract +could not just as well be denied as affirmed. In this sense philosophy +is unprepossessed</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, Die deutschen Universitaeten, +1902, 304 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). The highest achievement it declares +itself capable of, is not to point out the truth to its disciples, +for it does not know the truth itself, but only this: <q>We expect, +or at least we should expect, that during the years of study the +mind give itself earnestly to philosophy, and strive for a firm +grasp of ideas. The great pathfinders in world thought, <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, and whoever may be ranked with +them, remain the living teachers of philosophy.</q> Thus we +hold those great intellectual achievements, <hi rend='italic'>Plato's</hi> doctrine and +ideas, <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza's</hi> atheistic pantheism, <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle's</hi> objectivism and +<hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> subjectivism, with other views of the world of most +variegated patterns, all contradicting and excluding one another, +all dubious, none sure. What would be said of an +astronomy that could do nothing better than fix the telescope +on the different stars and then tell its disciples: Now look for +what you please, ideas of <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi> or <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>; <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle's</hi> +theory of the spheres or <hi rend='italic'>Newton's</hi> theory of gravity; each has +its points, but of none can it be said it is certain! Such an +astronomy would probably be left to its deserved fate. +</p> + +<p> +In the most important points of religion mankind has ever, +even in pagan times, recognized the truth, albeit imperfectly. +This is evinced by the conviction that there exists a personal +<pb n='135'/><anchor id='Pg135'/> +God and a hereafter; convictions which can be proved historically. +God's revelation has provided those who desire to believe +with a fuller knowledge of the truth: heaven and earth will +pass away, but these words will not pass away. But what is +already in our safe possession cannot be once more discovered by +research. What has already been found is no longer an object +of research. Mankind's lot would be a sad one indeed were +this unprepossessed science in the right; if in the most important +questions of life it were condemned forever to tantalizing +doubt. God's providence has ordained matters more +kindly for humanity. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, it is a poor science that has nothing to offer +but an eternal query for the truth. A poor science, that with +self-consciousness promises enlightenment and what not, but +finally can give nothing but ceaseless doubt instead of truth, +tormenting darkness instead of cheerful light. Why, then, research +where nothing can be found? Why raise searching eyes +to the sky when the stars do not show themselves? What kind +of progress is this when science does nothing further than dig +forever at the foundation? The great <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> has long +also passed judgment on this kind of science: <q>Such doubting +is abhorred by the City of God as false wisdom, because +among the things which we grasp with our intellect and reason +there is a knowledge, limited, it is true, because the soul is +weighed down by a perishable body, as the Apostle says: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>ex +parte scimus</foreign>—but which has full certainty</q> (De Civitate +Dei, XIX, 18). +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>An Erroneous Supposition.</head> + +<p> +The errors just dealt with, and the demand that scientific research +must doubt everything, is based on a supposition often +stated expressly as a principle, and which appears quite plausible +even to a mind not trained in philosophy. It says: There is +but one certainty, the scientific certainty; the certain possession +of the truth can be obtained only by scientific research. +To rid the world of error, we are told, <q>there is but one way, +viz., scientific work. Only science and scientific truth are able +to dispose of error</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Th. Lipps</hi>, Allgemeine Zeitung, Muenchen, +<pb n='136'/><anchor id='Pg136'/> +August 4, 1908). <q>Truth is scientific truth, based on criticism, +hence the religion of modern man must also rest on critical +truth.... There is no other authority but science</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Masaryk</hi>, +Kampf um die Religion, 13). +</p> + +<p> +This sort of speech we hear from the college chair as the +slogan for education and enlightenment: any one deficient in +science or in education belongs more or less to the unthinking +mass who have no convictions of their own, but submit blindly +to impressions and authority. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Such unclarified conceptions, with their inferences, are even met with +where they would not be expected, for instance, we read: <q>What the +average individual needed was a good shepherd, a shepherd's devotion +and love, that uplifts and urges onward; it was authority, Church-ministry +and care of souls, that was needed. The Church is an organized +pastorate, for the average individual likes to go with the flock. The +chosen are they who feel within themselves the great question of +truth as the care of their heart and task of their life, who experience its +tremendous tension, and who are struggling to the end with the intellectual +battles provoked by this question of truth. The average people, +<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, the many, the great majority, need something steady to which they +can cling—persons and teachers, laws and practice.</q> And why this +uncharitable distinction between people belonging to the flock and the +chosen ones, as if the Church and its ecclesiastical functions were only +appointed for the former? Particularly because <q>without methodical +scientific work man cannot attain to the truth</q> (<hi rend='italic'>H. Schell</hi>, Christus, +1900, 125, 64). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Thus science may summon everything before its forum, no +one having a right to interfere; in the superiority bestowed by +the right of autocracy it may sweep aside everything that is +opposed to it, no matter by what authority. Hence science must +be free to jolt everything, free to question the truth of everything, +which it has not itself examined and approved. This +is the fundamental supposition of modern freedom of science; +also a fatal error, betraying a woeful ignorance of the construction +of the human intellect, in spite of all its pretentiousness. As +a rule we have a true certainty in most matters, particularly in +philosophical-religious convictions, a certainty not gained by +scientific studies; by aid of the latter we may explain or +strengthen that certainty, but we are not free to upset it. +</p> + +<p> +We cannot avoid examining this point a little closer. There +is a twofold certainty, one, which we shall call the <emph>natural</emph> certainty, +<pb n='137'/><anchor id='Pg137'/> +is a firm conviction based on positive knowledge, but +without a clear reflexive consciousness of the grounds on which +the conviction is actually resting. Reason recognizes these +grounds, but the recognition is not distinct enough for reason +to become conscious of them, to be able to state them accurately +and in scientific formulas. <emph>scientific</emph> certainty is a firm +conviction, with a clear consciousness of the grounds, hence +it can easily account for them. Natural certainty is the usual +one in human life; scientific certainty is the privilege of but a +few, and even they have it in but very few things. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Everybody has a positive intellectual certainty that a complicated +order cannot be the result of accident, and that for every event +there must be a cause, though not every one will be able readily to demonstrate +the truth of his certainty. But if the philosopher should look +for the proof, he would do so in no other way than by reflecting upon his +natural and direct knowledge, and by trying to become conscious of what +he has thus directly found out. To illustrate by a few examples: We +are all convinced of the existence of an exterior world, and any one who +is not an idealist will call this conviction a reasonable certainty, and +yet only a few will be able to answer the subtle questions of a sceptic. +This certainty again is a natural but not a scientific one. How difficult +it is here also for reason to attain scientific certainty, how easy it is to +go astray in these researches, is proved by the errors of idealism so incomprehensible +to the untrained natural mind. Let us ask, finally, any +one: Why must we say: <q><emph>Cæsar</emph> defeated <emph>Pompey</emph>,</q> but not <q><emph>Cæsar</emph> defeated +of <emph>Pompey</emph></q>? He will tell us this is nonsense; maybe he will +add that the genitive has another meaning. But should I ask further +how the meaning of the genitive differs from that of the accusative, as +both cases seem to have often the same meaning, I shall get no answer. +There is a certitude, but only a natural one. Even if I should ask modern +students of the psychology and history of languages, like <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Paul</hi>, or whatever their names may be, I should not get a satisfactory +answer either. The whole logic of language, with its subtle forms and +moods of expression—how difficult for scientific research! And yet the +mind of even a child penetrates it, and not only a European child, but +the Patagonian and negro child, who is able to master by its intellectual +power complex languages, with four numbers, many moods, fourteen +tenses, etc. +</p> + +<p> +These examples will suffice, though volumes of them could be written. +They show us clearly a twofold certainty. The difference between +the natural and scientific certainty is not that the former is a blind conviction +formed at random, but only that one is not clearly conscious of +the reasons on which it rests, whereas this is the case in scientific certitude. +We see further the untrained power of the intellect manifest +itself in natural knowledge and certainty; for this purpose it is +primarily created; philosophical thought is difficult for it, and many +<pb n='138'/><anchor id='Pg138'/> +have no talent at all for it. It is also unfailing in apprehending directly +things pertaining to human life. Here the mind is free of that morbid +scepticism of which it too easily becomes a prey when it begins to +investigate and probe scientifically. What it there sees with certainty +cannot always be found here distinctly, and thus the mind begins to +doubt things it was hitherto sure of, and which often remain instinctively +certain to the mind despite its artificial doubts. Now we can also +understand why philosophers so often have doubts which to the untrained +look absurd, and why philosophers differ in their opinions on most +important things, whereas mankind guided by its natural certitude is +unanimous in them. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +This certainty is destined to be the reliable guide of man +through life. It precedes science, and can even exist without +it. Long before there was a science of art and of jurisprudence +the Babylonians and Egyptians had built their monuments, and +<hi rend='italic'>Solon</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Lycurgus</hi> had given their wise laws. And long before +philosophers were disputing about the moral laws, men had the +right view in regard to virtue and vice (cf. <hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi>, De Oratore, I, +32). The same certitude is also destined to guide man in the +more important questions, in the questions of religion and +morality. The Creator of human nature and its destiny, who +implanted instinct in the animal to guide it unconsciously in +the necessities of life, has also given to man the necessary light +to perceive with certainty truths without which it would be +impossible to live a life worthy of man. +</p> + +<p> +It is just this natural knowledge and certitude that gives man +certainty of divine revelation, after God vouchsafed to give it +to mankind for its unfailing guidance and help. For revelation +was not only intended for theologians, Bible critics, philosophers, +and Church-historians, but for all. And God has taken care, +as He had to do, that man has ample evidence that God has +spoken, and that the Church is the authorized Guardian of +this revelation, even without critical research in history and +philosophy. We have elsewhere briefly stated this evidence in +the words of the Vatican Council. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This evidence is seen in the invincible stability of the Church and its +unity of faith, the incontestable miracles never ceasing within it, the +grand figures of its Saints and Martyrs, virtue in the various classes, a +virtue increasing in proportion to the influence the Church exerts, the +spectacle that everything truly noble is attracted by the Christian faith +and the contrary repulsed. In addition the intrinsic grandeur and harmony +<pb n='139'/><anchor id='Pg139'/> +of the truths of faith, above all the unique figure of Christ, with +His wonderful life and sufferings, also the calm and peace of mind +effected in the soul of the faithful by living and thinking in this +faith; all these tell him that here the spirit of God is breathing, the +spirit of truth. The natural light of his intellect, further illuminated +by grace, suffices to give him a true intellectual certainty of his +faith, based upon these motives and similar ones, even without scientific +studies. The calmness of the mind that holds fast to this faith, +the compunction and unrest which follow defection from the faith, both +so characteristic of Catholics, prove that their minds embrace the +truth in their faith. +</p> + +<p> +Hence it betrays little philosophical knowledge of the peculiarity of +man's intellectual life, if infidelity approaches an inexperienced, +believing student, perhaps even an uneducated labourer, with the +express assurance that his faith hitherto has been but a blind belief, +an unintelligent following of the lead of a foreign authority, with the +distinct admonition to turn his back on the faith of his childhood. +</p> + +<p> +What has been said above makes it clear why a Catholic is not permitted +to have a serious doubt about his faith under the pretext that +he ought first to form a certain conviction all for himself by scientific +investigation. He has it already, if we presuppose sufficient instruction +and normal conditions; he may raise his natural certitude to a scientific +one by study if he has the time and talent for it, but he must not +condition his assent upon the success of his scientific investigations. He +has certitude; he has no right to demand scientific knowledge as a necessary +condition, because it is not required for certitude, and also because +it lies altogether outside of the conditions of human life. It would +amount simply to shaking off the yoke of truth. The Church teaches as +follows: <q>If any one says that the condition of the faithful and of those +who have not yet come to the only true faith is equal, so that Catholics +can have a just cause for suspending their assent and calling in question +the faith which they have received by the ministry of the Church until +they have completed the scientific demonstration of the credibility and +truth of it, let him be anathema.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +How high this wisdom rises above the limited thought of a +science that imagines itself alone to be wise! Sad indeed would +be the lot of mankind could it attain to certain truth in the most +important questions of life only by lengthy scientific investigations. +The overwhelming majority of mankind would be forever +excluded from the certain knowledge that there is a God, an +eternity, liberty, that there are immutable moral laws and truths, +on the value of which depends the woe and weal of humanity. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Behold the wisdom of the world that is put before us: <q>In order to +arrive at a definite conclusion by our own philosophical reasoning (on +the existence of God and the possibility of miracles) what a multitude +of things must be presupposed!</q> Thus we are informed in a philosophical +novel of modern times which aims at proving the incompatibility of +<pb n='140'/><anchor id='Pg140'/> +the Catholic duty to believe with the freedom of the intellect [Katholische +Studenten, by <hi rend='italic'>A. Friedwald</hi> (nom de plume). An explanation of +the ideas contained in it is given by the Academia 18, 1905-6, December +and March. The ideas found in the novel are also advanced by <hi rend='italic'>A. Messer</hi>, +Einführung in die Erkenntnistheorie, 1909, p. 158 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>]. And Prof. +<hi rend='italic'>Rhodius</hi>, who put the ideas of the novel in formulas, teaches: <q>The +question whether our knowledge could penetrate beyond what we know +by our experience and even our senses, is answered, as you know, in the +negative by a noted philosophical school. Hence, before attacking those +metaphysical questions regarding the existence of God and His relations +to the world, we must first try to have definite views as to the essence +of human knowledge, of its criterion, its scope, and of the degrees of its +certainty. But these preliminary questions of theoretic knowledge, how +difficult and perplexing they are! You probably have not the faintest +idea into what a mass of individual problems the main questions must +be dissected, nor what a multitude of heterogeneous views are struggling +here against one another</q> (p. 181). +</p> + +<p> +Consider how shortsighted a wisdom is manifested by these words. +Is it seriously intended to summon the peasant from his plough, the +old grandmother from behind the stove, and lead them into the lecture +rooms of the university in order that they might there listen to lectures +on phenomenalism, and positivism, and realism, and criticism, until +their heads are swimming? Or else can they not hope to arrive at the +truth? Do they seriously think that the truth asked for by every man, +the truth in the most vital questions of mankind, is the exclusive privilege +of a few college professors? And how very few. More than +twenty-four hundred years have elapsed since the days of <hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, +and yet modern philosophy still stands before the first preliminary +question in all knowledge, whether a man can know what the eye does +not see. <q>Many views are at variance there.</q> If this be the only way +for mankind to reach certain truth, then we are indeed in a pitiful +plight! +</p> + +<p> +We esteem philosophy and its subtle questions, and we heartily wish +our Catholic young men in college to obtain a more thorough philosophical +training. But if, involved in theories, one will lose his +insight into the world and human life to such a degree as to make of +the <q>wisdom of the world</q> an isolated narrow speculation which boasts +of being alone able to discover the higher truths, while withering in +neurasthenic doubt—such wisdom should be left to its deserved fate, +sterility. +</p> + +<p> +Or should it be possible to the ideal of Protestantism—and therefore +also of the modern spirit—to console mankind by pointing out that +the knowledge of the question which concerns us most deeply, <q>the +knowledge of God and the knowledge of good, remains but a leading +idea and problem, though we are confident of advancing nearer to its +solution</q>? Is thus mankind to be eternally without light in the most +important questions and problems? Every little plant and animal is +equipped by nature with everything it needs—and man alone to be a +failure? The young shoots of the tree strive to bring forth blossoms +and fruit, and succeed; the bird flies off in the fall in quest of a new +home, and finds it; hunger and thirst demand food and get it; only the +<pb n='141'/><anchor id='Pg141'/> +aim of the human mind shall never be fulfilled—he alone shall ever +pine without hope!—<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Dicentes se esse sapientes stulti facti sunt.</foreign> What +a difference between such principles and the grand thoughts of Christianity! +A difference like that between peace and eternal restless doubt, +like that between man's dignity and man's degradation, between man's +short-sightedness and the wisdom of God. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Hence the result of our discussion is: independent of science +mankind has its positive convictions, independent of science +it finds here rest and gratification in its longing for truth. +Scientific study and research are for the purpose of setting +these truths in a brighter light, of defending the patrimony of +mankind. But the fosterer of science must not claim the freedom +to ignore these positive convictions in himself and in others, +to endanger the patrimony of mankind by doubts and attacks +instead of protecting it, much less must he condemn the human +mind to the eternal labour of <hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi>, to the eternal rolling +of a huge stone which, recoiling, must always be lifted anew. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='142'/><anchor id='Pg142'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter IV. Accusations And Objections.</head> + +<p> +Among the notable facts in history one stands out prominently, +it is more remarkable than any other, and evokes +serious thought. It is the fact that the Christian religion, especially +its foremost representative, the Catholic Church, concerning +which every unbiassed critic is bound to admit that none +has made more nations moral, happy and great than this +Church; that nowhere else has virtue and holiness flourished +more than in her; that no one else has laboured more for truth +and purity of morals; that nevertheless there is not, and +never was, an institution which has more enemies, which has +been more persecuted, than the Catholic Church. This fact will +suggest to every serious-minded critic the question, whether we +have not here focussed that tremendous struggle, which truth +and justice have ever waged in the bosom of mankind against +error and passions—an image of the struggle raging in every +human breast. The Church recognizes in this fact the fulfilment +of the prophecy of her Founder: <q>And ye shall be hated by all +men for my name's sake</q> (Luke xxi. 17). And the Church may +add, that in her alone this prophecy is being fulfilled. +</p> + +<div> +<head>The Enemy of Progress.</head> + +<p> +In her journey through the centuries the Church has had to +listen to many accusations because she, the keeper of the truth +entrusted to her care, has refused to respond to the demand to +accept unconditionally the ideals devised by existing fashions. +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Cantavimus vobis et non saltastis</foreign> (we have piped to you and +you have not danced). Therefore the Church has been called +reactionary; the heretics of the first centuries of Christianity +denounced her as the enemy of the higher gnosis; a later period +<pb n='143'/><anchor id='Pg143'/> +denounced her as an enemy of the genuine humanism, in the +eighteenth century she was denounced as the enemy of enlightenment, +to-day she is denounced as the enemy of progress. Again +the Church is accused before the judicial bar of the children of +the age. They desire to eat plentifully from the tree of knowledge, +but the Church, they say, prevents them. They wish to +climb the heights of human perfection, to ascend higher than any +preceding generation, but the Church holds them back. She +will keep them in the fetters of her guardianship. And with +a keen, searching eye the smart children of our age have looked +the old Church over, taking notice of everything, anxious to put +her in the wrong. +</p> + +<p> +Their charges do not fail to make an impression, even on the +Church herself. She wishes to justify herself before the plaintiffs, +and still more before her own children who trust in her. +Thus she has not hesitated in declaring loudly on most solemn +occasions that <emph>she is not an enemy of noble science</emph> and of +human progress, and with great earnest she takes exception to +this charge. +</p> + +<p> +No wonder, one might say, that the Church makes such assurances. +It is time for her to realize that unless she can clear +herself from it this accusation will be her moral ruin at a time +when the banner of progress is held aloft, and when even the +Catholic world shares in that progress. True, but let us not +forget this: if there is anything characteristic of the Catholic +Church it is her frankness and honesty. She is not afraid to +proclaim her doctrines and judgments before the whole world; +she leaves her Index and Syllabus open for inspection, openly +avowing that she is the irreconcilable enemy of that emancipated +freedom proclaimed by modern liberalism as the ideal of the age. +It is the honesty which she inherited from her Founder, who told +the truth to friend and enemy, to His disciples and to the +Scribes, to <hi rend='italic'>Nicodemus</hi>, that lonely night, and to <hi rend='italic'>Caiaphas</hi>. With +the same straightforwardness the Church declares that she +feels not enmity but sympathy toward civilization. A fair-minded +critic will admit here again that the Church is in +earnest. <q>Far from opposing the fostering of human arts and +sciences, the Church is supporting and promoting them in +<pb n='144'/><anchor id='Pg144'/> +various ways,</q> declares the Vatican Council. <q>The Church does +not underrate nor despise their advantages for human life: on +the contrary, it avows that they, coming as they do from God, +the Master of the sciences, also lead to God by aid of His grace, +when properly used</q> (Sess. III, c. 4). The Church has put +this accusation on the list of errors of the age condemned by +<hi rend='italic'>Pius X.</hi> (Sent. 57). She feels the charge as an injury. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Testimony of History.</head> + +<p> +Nevertheless, in anti-ecclesiastical circles it is taken very often +for an established fact that the Roman Church has ever tried +her best to hamper the progress of science, or has suppressed it, +or at least scowled at it. How could it be otherwise? they say. +How could she favour the progress made in enlightening reason +or in advancing human knowledge? Must she not fear for its +intellectual sway over men whom she keeps under the yoke of +faith? Must she not fear that they might awaken from the +slumber in which they were held prisoners by the suggestive +force of her authority, held to be transcendental; that they +might awaken to find out the truth for themselves? And what is +the use of science? He that believes will be saved: hence faith +suffices. If we wish to hear the accusation in the language of +militant science, here it is: <q>Outside the monastic institutions +no attempt at intellectual advancement was made (in the +Middle Ages), indeed, so far as the laity were concerned, the +influence of the Church was directed to an opposite result, +for the maxim universally received was, that <q>ignorance is the +mother of devotion</q></q> (<hi rend='italic'>J. W. Draper</hi>, History of the Conflict +between Religion and Science). +</p> + +<p> +This is the train of thought and the result of anti-ecclesiastical +a-priorism and its historical research. Are the plain facts of +history in accord with it? The first and immediate task of +the Church is certainly not to disseminate science: her task, +first of all, lies in the province of morals and religion. But +as she is the highest power of morality and religion, she stands +in the midst of mankind's intellectual life, and cannot but come +in contact with its other endeavours, owing to the close unity +<pb n='145'/><anchor id='Pg145'/> +of that life. Hence, let us ask history, not about everything +it might tell us in this respect, but about one thing only. +</p> + +<p> +We do not wish to show how the Church, headed by the +Papacy, has become the mother of Western civilization and +culture. Nor shall we enumerate the merits of the Church +in art, nor point out the alertness she has certainly shown, +in her walk through the centuries, by taking up the intellectual +achievements of the time and assimilating them with her moral +and religious treasure of faith, withal preserved unchanged. The +old Church had done this with the treasures of ancient learning +and science; <q>this spirit of Christianity proved itself by the +facility with which Christian thinkers gathered the truth contained +in the systems of old philosophy, and, even before +that, by assimilating those old truths into Christian thought, the +beginning of which had already been made in the New Testament. +They were appropriated, without hesitating experiment, +without wavering, and were given their place in a higher order</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>O. Willmann</hi>, Gesch. des Idealismus, 2d ed., II, 1907, 67). +This, she unceasingly continues to do, as proved by the high +standard of Catholic life and Catholic science at the present, a +fact not even disputed by opponents. We point only incidentally +to <emph>the foundation and the fostering of primary schools</emph> +by the Church. It is an historical fact that public education +began to thrive only with the freer unfolding of the Church. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The first elementary schools were those of the monasteries. Later +on there were established after their pattern the cathedral and chapter +schools, then the parish schools. Still later there came the town and +village schools—all of ecclesiastical origin, or at least under the +direction of the Church and in close connection with her. As early +as 774 we find an ecclesiastical school law, to the effect that each +Bishop should found an ecclesiastical school in his episcopal town and +appoint a competent teacher to instruct <q>according to the tradition +of the Romans.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Eugene II.</hi> ordained in 826 anew that efficient +teachers should be provided for the cathedral schools wherever needed, +who were <q>to lecture on the sciences and the liberal arts with zeal.</q> +<q>All Bishops should have the liberal arts taught at their churches,</q> +was a resolution of the Council held in Rome in 1079 by <hi rend='italic'>Gregory VII.</hi> +We read in the acts of the Lateran Synod of 1179: <q>Inasmuch as it +behooves the Church, like a loving mother, to see to it that poor children +who cannot count upon the support of their parents should not +lack opportunity of learning to read and make progress, there should +at every cathedral church be given an adequate prebend to the teacher—who +<pb n='146'/><anchor id='Pg146'/> +is to teach the clerics of this church and the poor pupils +gratuitously</q> (<hi rend='italic'>E. Michael</hi>, Gesch. des Deutschen Volkes II, 1899, 370). +School education flourished more and more; in the thirteenth century +it was in full bloom. In Germany even many unimportant places, +market towns, boroughs, and villages had their schools at that time. In +Mayence and its immediate neighbourhood there were, in the twelfth +and thirteenth centuries, seven chapter schools; at Muenster at least +four schools; the clerical schools at Erfurt had an attendance of no +less than 1,000 pupils. About the year 1400 the diocese of Prague alone +had 460 schools. In the middle Rhine district, about the year 1500, +many counties had an elementary school for every radius of two leagues; +even rural communities with 500 to 600 inhabitants, like Weisenau near +Mainz, and Michaelstadt in Odenwald, did not lack schools. (<hi rend='italic'>J. +Janssen</hi>, Gesch. des Deutschen Volkes, 15th ed., 1890, 26; cf. Michael, +1. c. 402, 417-419; <hi rend='italic'>Palacky</hi>, Gesch. v. Boehmen, III, 1, p. 186). +Even in far-off Transylvania there was, as early as the fourteenth century, +no village without a church and a school (<hi rend='italic'>K. Th. Becker</hi>, Die +Volksschule der Siebenbuerger Sachsen, 1894, y; Michael, 430). There +is no doubt that this flourishing state of schools was due in the first +place to the stimulus, support, and unselfish effort of the Church. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +But we will not dwell longer on this subject. We wish, however, +to point out more plainly something more closely related +to our subject, viz., <emph>the attitude of the Church towards +the universities</emph>, at a time when the most prominent nurseries +of science were first coming into existence and beginning +to flourish, when they began to exert their influence upon +the civilization of Europe. Here, in the first place, it should +become clear whether it be true that the Church has ever looked +upon the progress of science with suspicion or even suppressed +it. History teaches, in this instance again, that no one has +shown more interest, more devotion, more readiness, to make +sacrifices in promoting the establishment and growth of the +university, than the Church. +</p> + +<p> +When, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the thirst for +knowledge, stronger than at any time in history, made itself +felt in the Christian countries of Europe, there were erected in +the universities great international homes of science, so as to +gratify the deeply felt need of education. And thousands +hastened to these places to acquire the knowledge of the +period, overcoming all difficulties, then much greater than +now. A recent writer remarks about this not without reason: +<q>The academic instruction met on part of the thronging +<pb n='147'/><anchor id='Pg147'/> +thousands with a psychic disposition more favourable than at +any other time. In a way it was here a case of first love</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>W. Muench</hi>, Zukunftspaedagogik, 1908, 337). At the universities +of the Middle Ages there were taught theology, ecclesiastical +and civil law, the liberal arts, and medicine. But not in the +manner that all four faculties were everywhere represented. +Theology especially was quite frequently lacking, though the +aim was to have all sciences represented. What since the beginning +of the thirteenth century was first of all understood by +a university were <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>studia generalia</foreign>—then the usual name for +universities, in contradistinction to <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>studium particulare</foreign>. Universities +enjoyed the privilege of having their academic degrees +honoured everywhere, and their graduates could teach anywhere. +The universities were of an international character. Hence it +happened that at the German universities there were sitting in +quest of knowledge by the side of Germans also foreign youths, +from Scotland, Sweden, and Norway, from Italy and France, +all contending for academic honours—a moment which unquestionably +contributed in no small degree to the improvement +of education. +</p> + +<p> +Prior to the Reformation, universities were not state institutions, +as they are at present in Europe, but free, independent +corporations. They were complete in themselves, they made +their own statutes, had their own jurisdiction, and many other +privileges. The modern university enjoys but a small remnant +of those ancient prerogatives. In a public speech, made in the +presence of the Duke of Saxony, the Leipsic professor, <hi rend='italic'>Johann +Kone</hi>, could say in 1445: <q>No king, no chancellor, has any +right to interfere with our privileges and exemptions; the university +rules itself, and changes and improves its statutes according +to its needs</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Janssen</hi>, 1. c. 91). +</p> + +<p> +Up to the year 1300 there were no less than 23 universities +established in Italy, 5 in France, 2 in England, 4 in Spain, and +1 in Portugal. <q>Had all intentions been realized, Europe would +have had by the year 1400 no fewer than 55 universities, including +Paris and Bologna. But of 9 of them there are extant only +the charter deeds that were never executed. At any rate, there +were 46 of them, of which 37 or 39 existed at the turn of +<pb n='148'/><anchor id='Pg148'/> +the fourteenth century; a considerable number, which was not +known till recent years</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>). Germany, Austria, and +Hungary shared in 8: Prague, Cracow, Vienna, Fuenfkirchen, +Ofen, Heidelberg, Cologne, and Erfurt. Within fifty years, from +1460 to 1510, no less than 9 universities were founded in Germany—a +clear proof of the generous enthusiasm for science +of that period. +</p> + +<p> +By their fostering and founding of universities, secular +princes have won the lasting gratitude of posterity, and so have +the municipalities of a later period for showing an even greater +zeal than those princes. But it was indisputably the Church that +bestowed upon these homes of learning and culture the greatest +benevolence and support for their foundation and maintenance. +</p> + +<p> +In the first place, history shows that the majority of them +were founded by <emph>Papal charters</emph>. Since universities were +understood to have the power of conferring degrees of international +value, they had to be universally acknowledged; this could +be effected only by an authority of universal recognition; hence +by the Roman-German Emperor—as the supreme prince of the +world-wide Christian monarchy, or by the Pope, who was considered +in the first place. He was the general Father and +Teacher of Christendom; this is why Papal charters were so +zealously sought after, in addition to imperial charters. Of +the 44 universities called into existence before the year 1400, +31 were founded by Papal charters. A similar condition prevailed +in the fifteenth century and afterwards, up to the Reformation. +This was no interference in foreign affairs: such an +interpretation would have caused just surprise in the Middle +Ages. That the highest spiritual power on earth should have +the first claim in education was a matter of general concession. +And certainly the manner in which the Church made +use of this right, to speak with an historian of the universities, +forms <q>one of the most important, and by no means least inglorious, +parts of an activity so manifold and difficult</q> (<hi rend='italic'>V. A. +Huber</hi>, Die Englischen Universitaeten, I, 1839, p. 14). +</p> + +<p> +These Papal charters breathe a warm <emph>benevolence</emph> for +science. Everywhere we find the wish expressed, that studies +thrive in those places which are most suitable for the effectual +<pb n='149'/><anchor id='Pg149'/> +spread of science, and that the different countries have a sufficient +number of scientifically trained men. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Read, for instance, the charter given by Pope <hi rend='italic'>Boniface VIII.</hi> to +Pamiers and Avignon, or the Letter of Privileges granted to Coimbra by +<hi rend='italic'>Clement V.</hi> (apud <hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 793, 524), or <hi rend='italic'>Pius II.'s</hi> Bull founding the +university of Basle. The Pope says here about the aim of science: +<q>Among the various blessings to which man may by the grace of God +attain in this mortal life, the last place is not to be given to persevering +study, by which man may gain the pearl of the sciences, which +point out the way to a good and happy life, and by their excellence +elevate the learned men above the uneducated. Science makes man +like to God, and enables him to clearly perceive the secrets of the +world. It aids the unlearned, it elevates to sublime heights those +born in the lowliest condition.</q> <q>For this reason the Holy See has +always promoted the sciences, given them homes, and provided for +their wants, that they might flourish, so that men, well directed, might +the more easily acquire so lofty a human happiness, and, when +acquired, share it with others.</q> This was the longing desire that +led to the opening at Basle of <q>a plentiful spring of science, of whose +fulness all those may draw who desire to be introduced into the study +of the mysteries of Scripture and learning.</q> Even prior to this, the +same Pope had written to the Duke <hi rend='italic'>Louis of Bavaria</hi>: <q>The Apostolic +See desires the widest possible extension of science,</q> which, <q>while +other things are exhausted by dissemination, is the only thing that +expands the more the greater the number of those reached by it</q> +(apud <hi rend='italic'>Janssen</hi>, 1. c, p. 89). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +But the Church was not satisfied with granting charters. +She also gave very <emph>substantial material aid</emph> to most of the +universities. The Popes maintained two universities at Rome, +one of them connected with the Papal Curia, a sort of court-school. +It was founded by <hi rend='italic'>Innocent IV.</hi>, in order that the many +who came to the Papal court from all parts of Christendom might +satisfy also their thirst for knowledge. Theology, law, especially +civil law, medicine, and languages, including Oriental languages, +were taught there. Besides this there was another university at +Rome, founded by <hi rend='italic'>Boniface VIII.</hi> for a similar purpose: it did +not flourish long, though in 1514 it counted no less than eighty-eight +professors. Many attempts to found or support universities +would have proved abortive had not the Popes provided for +the salaries of professors by prebends and stipends, and by +allotting to that end a portion of the income of priests and +churches. Bishops, too, proved themselves zealous patrons of +<pb n='150'/><anchor id='Pg150'/> +the universities (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, Gesch. des gelehrten Unterrichts, 2d +ed., I, 1898, p. 27). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Thus, to cite a few examples of German universities, there was in +1532, with the consent of the Archbishop <hi rend='italic'>Arnest</hi>, a contribution raised +by the clergy for the endowment of the university of Prague, to which +the various cloisters and chapters, especially those at Prague, contributed. +With the money thus raised the Archbishop purchased property, +the income from which was to provide salaries for the professors. +Twelve professors received from <hi rend='italic'>Urban V.</hi> the canonicates of the +church of All Saints (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 598). Erfurt university was given 4 +canonicates, Cologne 11, Greifswald still more. Similarly Tuebingen, +Breslau, Rostock, Wittenberg, and Freiburg were cared for (<hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann</hi>, +Die Gesch. der Deutschen Universitaeten, II, 1896, p. 34, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +Vienna found a benefactor in the pastor of Gars, who on October +13, 1370, founded a purse for 3 sublectors and 1 scholar. Heidelberg +received 10 canonicates. Its great benefactor was the learned <hi rend='italic'>Johann +von Dalberg</hi>, first curator of the university, and later Bishop of +Worms. Under him Heidelberg reached the zenith of its lustre, and +laid the foundation of almost all that has won it the reputation it +at present enjoys. By his co-operation the first chair of Greek was +founded; to him the foundation of the college library is due, which +later on gained world-wide fame under the name of <q>Palatina.</q> He +further collected a private library, rich in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew +books, the use of which was open to all scientists. <q>The Rhenish Literary +Society</q> attained its greatest prominence under his direction +(<hi rend='italic'>Janssen</hi>, 1. c. 100-105). Ingolstadt, too, obtained its needed income +by the donation of rich church-prebends, to such an extent that the +<q>endowments netted the university about 2,500 florins,</q> a very large +sum for that time (<hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann</hi>, 1. c. 38). <hi rend='italic'>Prantl</hi> also admits in regard +to Ingolstadt: <q>The Papal Curia did its best to furnish the university</q> +(Gesch. der Ludwig-Maximilian in Ingolstadt, 1872, I, 19, apud <hi rend='italic'>Janssen</hi>, +1. c. p. 9). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is true, the Church then owned much property. But it +is just as true that she was ever ready to support science and +colleges out of this property. Pope and clergy were also taking +incessant pains to make it possible for <emph>poor students</emph> to +attend the university, not only for theological students, but +for those of all the faculties, to give an opportunity to rich and +poor alike to enjoy the advantages of higher education. Stipends +and legacies of this kind are numerous. Even in our +own days many a son of an <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>alma mater</foreign> owes the stipend he +enjoys to endowments made by the Church. In the course +of time there were established at most of the universities so-called +<pb n='151'/><anchor id='Pg151'/> +<emph>colleges</emph> for the purpose of offering shelter and maintenance +to poor students. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +These colleges contributed essentially to the flourishing condition +of the university. Thus <hi rend='italic'>Albrecht v. Langenstein</hi> suggested, at the founding +of Vienna university, to the Duke, <hi rend='italic'>Albrecht of Austria</hi>, the establishment +of such colleges, inasmuch as the continuance of the university +was dependent on them, and stated that Paris owed its prosperity to +them (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 624). +</p> + +<p> +The Popes set here the best example. <hi rend='italic'>Zoen</hi>, Bishop of Avignon, had +provided in his testament that eight students from the province of +Avignon should be maintained at Bologna by his successors from their +estates at Bologna. These estates, however, were sold later on. <hi rend='italic'>John +XXII.</hi> then interfered in favour of the students injured thereby and annulled +the deed of purchase. The income was set aside and increased to +an amount sufficient for thirty scholars; later on the Pope endeavoured +to raise their number to fifty. At the same celebrated academy, which, +next to Paris, had long been a beacon of science sought from near and +afar, <hi rend='italic'>Urban V.</hi> founded a home for poor students and directed the appropriation +of 4,000 gold ducats a year for it. From June 16, 1367, to June +15, 1368, the home received an appropriation of 5,908 ducats in gold and +155 baskets of cereals. His successor, <hi rend='italic'>Gregory XI.</hi>, set himself to the +task of completing the work begun. Out of the income of the Church +he ordered appropriated in the future 1,500 ducats a year for thirty +students, of whom one half were to study Canon Law, the other half +Civil Law. He then decreed the purchase of a home for 4,500 ducats +in gold, and ordered to pay out immediately 4,000 florins in gold for +the next school year. Besides the college named, <hi rend='italic'>Urban V.</hi> had founded +one at Montpellier for medical students, and another, which had its seat +at first at Trets, later at Monosque. During his pontificate this Pope +maintained no less than 1,000 students at various institutions. Toulouse +also had several colleges for poor students, founded by high princes +of the Church. In the year 1359 <hi rend='italic'>Innocent VI.</hi> devoted his own home +at Toulouse with all its possessions and its entire income to twenty +poor students, ten of whom were to study Canon Law and ten Civil +Law. For their further maintenance he ordered given to them, besides +other things, 25,000 florins in gold <q>manualiter</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 213 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>, +308 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>, 339). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Finally, nearly all universities, whether they owed their existence +to ecclesiastical or civil power, received many and far-reaching +<emph>privileges</emph> from the Popes. Not the least one was for +clerical students the dispensation to free them from the requirement +of residence for the enjoyment of their benefices, +which made it possible for them to study in remote university +towns, where they were free to study not only theology, +but other sciences as well. This dispensation was quite common. +<pb n='152'/><anchor id='Pg152'/> +Furthermore, the Popes protected in the most energetic way the +universities in their privileges and freedom every time they +were applied to for aid. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This happened, for instance, at Bologna. The students there had +their free guilds. The municipal authorities began to restrict +their privileges by forbidding native students under heavy penalties +to study outside of Bologna, which was later on extended to the +alien students. The professors sided with the city. <hi rend='italic'>Honorius III.</hi> +in 1220 called upon the latter to repeal those statutes; if they wanted +to confine the students to the city, it should be done by clemency, +not with severity and coercion. The city relented. But we see again +in 1224 the students appeal, for the third time since 1217, to the +Pope, begging for protection. The tension had grown; the city was +actually beginning to use force. <hi rend='italic'>Honorius</hi> sharply rebuked the city +for this action, threatening excommunication if the authorities continued +to suppress freedom. The city yielded completely, and the freedom +of the students was saved, thanks to their protector. Later on +the Popes had to interfere again. <hi rend='italic'>Clement V.</hi> had already ordered +the Bishops to protect the students at Bologna. His successor, <hi rend='italic'>John +XXII.</hi>, received complaints that privileges of students in Italy were +being violated by authorities and citizens of the city. Against the Podesta +of Bologna especially complaints were made. The Pope, in 1321 +and 1322, bade the Bishops and Archbishops to take measures against +those who <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>directe et indirecte impedire dieuntur, ne ad praedictum +studium valeant declinare contra apostolica et imperialia privilegia</foreign>. +He appointed at Bologna a special protector and conservator of the +university. Some years after, when the Podesta declined to take the +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>juramentum de observandis statutis ejusdem studiis factis et faciendis</foreign>, +he was commanded to take the oath. +</p> + +<p> +At Orleans there was a flourishing law school; especially its <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>jus +civile</foreign> was famous. Professors and students were granted by <hi rend='italic'>Clement +V.</hi> the privilege of an autonomous university with the right of free +corporation, with the power to suspend lectures in case they could get +no satisfaction for any wrong done them. These privileges were a thorn +in the eye of the city; its citizens even allowed violence to be done +the university. Then <hi rend='italic'>Philip the Fair</hi> interfered, but in a way which +indicates that he did not know sufficiently the university life of the +Middle Ages. Moreover, he annulled the granted free fellowship, and +put professors and the students under civil supervision. But this was +not tolerated in those days. The king had at the same time given +many privileges, but they were disregarded. In 1316 professors and +students left Orleans and the university ceased to exist. The first +act of <hi rend='italic'>John XXII.</hi> upon ascending the Papal throne was to restore +this school, the French king himself having begged his support in the +matter. The king's suggestion to take the privilege of free fellowship +from the professors and students was rejected by the Pope. The +Pope reaffirmed all privileges granted to the university, whereupon the +professors and students returned, to inaugurate the most brilliant epoch +of their college. +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='153'/><anchor id='Pg153'/> + +<p> +Considering these facts, one may subscribe to the judgment of +<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi> which he pronounces at the conclusion of his thorough +treatise on the universities of the Middle Ages: <q>So far as +the foundation of the universities can be spoken of, its merit +belongs to the Popes, to secular rulers, clergy, and laity. +But that the lion's share belongs to the Popes every one must +admit who has followed my presentment, which is exclusively +based on documents, and who examines history with impartiality</q> +(Ib. 792 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). Even <hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann</hi>, who is very unfavourably +disposed towards the Church, cannot deny that <q>numerous +Popes have shown warm interest for the fostering of sciences +during those centuries, and were for the most part themselves +prominent representatives of science</q> (Ib. 403). +</p> + +<p> +That the mediæval universities in some points, though not +in all, were inferior to modern universities, was not their +fault. No good judge of human conditions could expect it +to be otherwise. The experience and efficiency of the mature +man is not attained at once, but only after the exertions and +experiments made by him during the period of youth and +development. At a time when all the experiences in the field +of school legislation, which are the property of the present +day, had yet to be collected, when the relation between +lower and higher schools had not been regulated in all respects, +at that time it was not possible to be in the position +we are in to-day. Future critics of our times will see in our +present educational systems many gross defects, which often are +not hidden even to our own eyes. But it would be arrogance +for them to belittle our efforts, the fruits of which they will +once enjoy without any merit on their part. The university of +yore conformed to the educational purposes of that period; it +was the focus of intellectual life, perhaps to a larger degree than +is the case to-day. This suffices. Moreover, the number of professors +was quite considerable, that of the students even more so. +In Bologna in 1388 the number of professors was 70, not including +the theologians, among them 39 jurists; in Piacenza +there were from the years 1398 to 1402 71 professors; among +them were 27 teachers of Roman law and 22 teachers of medicine +(<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 209, 571). +</p> + +<pb n='154'/><anchor id='Pg154'/> + +<p> +In regard to the zeal displayed by the Church in promoting +universities, it might be objected that she was caring in the +first place for <emph>theology</emph>, not for the other sciences, and that +the universities then had chiefly been established for theological +students. This, however, is not the case. The universities especially +favoured by the Popes were first of all law schools, +chiefly of civil law, or medical schools. Those at Bologna, +Padua, Florence, and Orleans were principally law schools; in +Italy, in general, chief attention was paid to jurisprudence, particularly +to Roman law. Montpellier was essentially a medical +college; it attained during the thirteenth century preponderance +even over Salerno. The assertion has been made that the +vigorous life at this medical college was owing to its independence +of Rome (<hi rend='italic'>Haeser</hi>, Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Medizin, +1, 655. Cfr. <hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 342). But <hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi> has proved that <q>clerical +organs have been the moving spirits of the medical college +at Montpellier.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Nor did the Papal charter deeds exclude any profane science. +The common formula, which always prevails, authorizes to teach +indiscriminately <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>in jure canonico et civili necnon in medicina +et qualibet alia licita facultate</foreign>. Only one science was frequently +excepted, and that was just theology. Of the forty-six +high schools that had been established up to the year 1400, +about twenty-eight, therefore nearly two-thirds, excluded by their +charter the teaching of theology. At first a number of universities +sprang up merely as law schools, others as medical +schools, and there was then no need to include the science +of theology in the schedule of studies. Furthermore, Paris +was ever since the twelfth century looked upon as the home and +the natural place for theology (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 703 f.). Hence the +benevolence of the Church towards the universities was not +merely determined by selfish interest. +</p> + +<p> +Or was it, nevertheless? May the Church not have bestowed +so much care on the homes of science in order to increase her own +influence thereby, and also with an eye to the future? This +assertion has been made. But this assertion is an injustice and +it is against the testimony of history. The Popes very often +issued their charter deeds only then, when request was made +<pb n='155'/><anchor id='Pg155'/> +by worldly rulers and by the cities themselves. Hence there +was no hurried self-assertion. And the Church has never denied +the right to worldly powers to found their own high schools. +The theologians of the thirteenth century expressedly declared +it to be the duty of princes to provide for institutions of learning +(Cfr. <hi rend='italic'>Thomas of Aquin</hi>, De regimine principum, I, 13; Op. +contra impug. relig. 3). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Thus up to the year 1400 nine high schools had received no charters +at all, ten only imperial charters or charters from their local sovereigns. +If the Popes had cared only about their influence, why then did they +treat such colleges with the same benevolence? Spain's first college +was founded at Paleneia in the years 1212-1214 by <hi rend='italic'>Alfonso VIII.</hi> +without asking the Pope. When soon afterwards it was in trouble +it was <hi rend='italic'>Honorius III.</hi> who aided <hi rend='italic'>Alfonso's</hi> successor in restoring it, +by assigning some ecclesiastical income to its professors. When +the college was nearly wrecked and Rome once more applied to for help, +<hi rend='italic'>Urban IV.</hi> lent an aiding hand because he did not want <hi rend='italic'>ut lucerna +tanta claritatis in commune mutorum dispendium sic extincta remaneat</hi>. +<hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi> had founded a university of his own. When +it failed it was <hi rend='italic'>Clement IV.</hi> who urged <hi rend='italic'>King Charles</hi> of Anjou to re-establish +it. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>In eodem regno facias et jubeas hujusmodi studium +reformari</foreign> (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, 478, 459). This is not the language and action +of one who is only ruled by the passion to spread his own influence, and +not guided by benevolence for science. +</p> + +<p> +But it is true, in supporting the higher schools the Church did +not aim at science as its ultimate object; it was her view that science +should serve the material welfare of man, but still more the highest +ethical and religious purpose of life. This in general was the conception +of the entire Middle Ages. At that time it would have been considered +curious to seek a science ultimately for its own sake. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +And the universities repaid the Church by gratitude and devotion. +The effort has been made to demonstrate that the +modern separation of science from religion had already begun +in the Middle Ages, and had showed itself everywhere; this +tendency for autonomy <q>appeared at first only timidly and in +manifold disguises</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann</hi>, 14). How easy it is to find +such disguises may be shown by an example. The university +of Paris had after the death of <hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas</hi> asked for his remains. +<hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann</hi> holds that the notion of the autonomy +of science had found sharp expression in the memorandum +wherein the university stated the motive of its request. +Now how does this harmless document sound? <q>Quoniam +<pb n='156'/><anchor id='Pg156'/> +omnino est indecens et indignum ut alia ratio aut locus quam +omnium studiorum nobilissima Parisiensis civitas quae ipsum +prius educavit nutrivit et fovit et post modum ad eodem doctrinae +monumenta et ineffabilia fomenta suscepit ossa ... +habeat.... Si enim Ecclesia merito ossa et reliquias Sanctorum +honorat nobis non sine causa videtur honestum et sanctum tanti +doctoris corpus in perpetuum penes nos habere in honore.</q> Evidently +the university requests the relic for itself, or rather for +the Parisiensis civitas, not in opposition to the Church, but in +opposition to other cities, altera natio aut locus. I wonder if +the Parisian admirers of St. Thomas ever dreamed that they +would one day be put in the light of forerunners of liberal +science, because of their pious application for the bones of their +great teacher? This is tantamount to carrying one's own idea +into the fact. <hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, probably the most competent judge +of the affairs of mediæval universities, writes as follows: <q>If +we weigh the different acts which suggest themselves to us in +these various foundations, and if we compare them with one another, +there is revealed to us, in the realm of history of the +foundation of mediæval universities, a wonderful harmony between +Church and State, between the spiritual and material. +This is the reason why the universities of the Middle Ages +appear to us as the highest civil as well as the highest ecclesiastical +teaching institutions. Fundamentally, they are the +product of the Christian spirit which penetrated the whole, +wherein Pope and Prince, clergy and laity, each held the proper +position</q> (l. c. p. 795). +</p> + +<p> +One consequence of this relation between the universities and +the Church was that <q>they attained their greatest prosperity as +long as the unity of Church and faith remained unimpaired, and +that, at the time of the Reformation, they all sided with the +Church with the exception of two, Wittenberg and Erfurt. Torn +away from their ecclesiastical and established basis only by +violent means, they were led to the new doctrine, but really succumbed +to it only when their freedom had been curtailed and +they had been reduced to state institutions</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Janssen</hi>, l. c. p. 91). +They had been, as the learned <hi rend='italic'>Wimpheling</hi> wrote at the +close of the sixteenth century, <q>the most favoured daughters +<pb n='157'/><anchor id='Pg157'/> +of the Church, who tried to repay by fidelity and attachment +what they owed to their Mother</q> (De arte impressoria, apud +<hi rend='italic'>Janssen</hi>, l. c. 91). +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>A False Progress.</head> + +<p> +Hence history cannot subscribe to the accusation that the +Church is the enemy of progress. How then does it happen that +this accusation is made so frequently? The idea suggests itself +that there may be here a different meaning given to the word +<q>progress,</q> that the Church opposes a certain kind of progress +which her enemies call <q>the</q> progress. And this is the actual +fact. If we examine the proofs which are to show the hostile +attitude of the Church, we meet at every step <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, the Copernican +system, the Syllabus, and Index. But this appears only on +the surface, which hides beneath it something that is easily overlooked +by the cursory glance. And this is the precise definition +of scientific and civilized progress. Progress has ever been +an ideal of powerful attraction. The noblest and best of men +have ever displayed the most earnest endeavour onward and +upward. In our times, however, this ideal comes forward differently +garbed, in the name of the new view of the world, and +resolutely censures as reactionary everything that will oppose it. +What is this definition? +</p> + +<p> +Since the <emph>theory of evolution</emph> of <hi rend='italic'>Lamarck</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> +entered biology, it has also more and more invaded other branches +of science. The principle is now that everywhere, in the organic +or inorganic world and in the whole province of human life +there is a gradual growth and change—nothing permanent, +nothing definite and absolute. Uninterrupted evolution hitherto; +hereafter restless development; especially in the greatest +good belonging to human life, thought, philosophy, and +chiefly religion. Here, too, there are no forms nor dogmas +which evolution in its continual development does not evolve +and elevate. This idea of evolution is supplemented by subjectivism +with its <emph>relativism of truth</emph>: all views, especially +philosophical and religious <q>Truths,</q> are no longer the reproduction +of objectively existing things, but a creation of the +<pb n='158'/><anchor id='Pg158'/> +subject, of his inner experience and feeling; hence each age +must proceed to new thought of <emph>its own</emph>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>The methods of scientific research,</q> we are told, <q>are determined +by the idea of evolution, and this applies not only to natural sciences +but also to the so-called intellectual sciences,—history, philology, +philosophy, and theology. The idea of evolution influences and dominates +all our thoughts; without it progress in the field of scientific +knowledge is quite impossible.</q> We read, for instance, in the modern +history of philosophy: <q>The rise and fall of a system is a necessary +part of universal history; it is conditioned by the character of its +time, the system being the understanding of that time, while this +understanding of the time is conditioned by the fact that the time +has changed.</q> At <hi rend='italic'>Roscellin's</hi> time the nominalists were intellectually +inferior; but where there is question of undermining the militant +Church of the Middle Ages the nominalists will be considered to have +been the greater philosophers. In this the realists <q>by the futility +of their struggle proved that the time for nominalism had arrived, +hence that whoever favours it understands the time better; that is, +more philosophically. After the beginning of the Renaissance we +notice an attempt at philosophizing in such a way as to ignore the +existence of divine wisdom taught by Christianity. The pre-Christian +sages had done so: to philosophize in their spirit was therefore the +task of the time, and those who had a better understanding of the +time philosophized that way better than by the scholastic method; +though their method may appear reactionary to unphilosophical +minds</q> (<hi rend='italic'>J. E. Erdmann</hi>, Grundriss der Gesch. der Philosophie, 3d +ed., I (1878), 4, 262, 434, 502). This is a frank denial of any truth +in philosophy: the more neological and modern a thing is, the more +truth there is in it! Realism was right in <hi rend='italic'>Roscellin's</hi> time, but a +later period had to sweep it away. The Christian religion was right for +the Middle Ages, but when the Greek authors began to be read again +it was no longer modern. +</p> + +<p> +Apostasy from the faith is considered a mark of progress. <q>Italian +natural philosophy,</q> we are told, <q>reached its pinnacle with <hi rend='italic'>Bruno</hi> +and <hi rend='italic'>Campanella</hi>, of whom the former, though the older, appears to +be more progressive on account of his freer attitude towards the +Church</q> (<hi rend='italic'>R. Falkenburg</hi>, Gesch. der neueren Philosophie, 5th ed. +(1905), page 30, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). Hence evidently further development of Christianity, +too, is demanded. According to subjectivistic views it was +hitherto only an historical product of the human intellect: hence +<q>onward to new and higher forms corresponding to modern thought +and feeling, onward to a new Christianity without dogmas and authority!</q> +<q>Break up those old tablets,</q> spoke <hi rend='italic'>Zarathustra</hi>. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Such is progress in thought and science, for which the way +must be opened. That the immutable dogmas of Christianity, +that the task of the Catholic Church to preserve revelation intact, +are incompatible with it, that the Church appears reactionary, +<pb n='159'/><anchor id='Pg159'/> +and as an obstacle to this progress, is now self-evident. Here +we have the <emph>deeper contrast between progress, in the anti-Christian +sense, and the essence of Christianity</emph> in general, +and, especially, of the <emph>Catholic Church</emph>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>It is frankly admitted that the issue is the struggle between the +two views of the world—between the Christian, conservative dogmatism +and the anti-dogmatic evolutionary philosophy</q> (Neue Freie +Presse, Jun. 7, 1908). Faith according to its very essence is immutable +and stationary, science is essentially progressive: they had therefore +to part in a manner which could not be kept a secret. <q>A divine +revelation must necessarily be intolerant of contradiction, it must +repudiate all improvement in itself</q> (<hi rend='italic'>J. Draper</hi>, History of the +Conflict between Religion and Science, VI). <q>The great opposition +between the rigid dogmatism of the Roman Catholic Church and the +ever progressing modern science cannot be removed</q> (Academicus, l. c. +362). So say the opponents of the Church. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +There is no error, says <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>, which does not contain +some truth, especially when it is able to rule the thought of +many. Hence its capacity to deceive. The same is true in the +present case. +</p> + +<p> +There is evolution and progress in everything, or at least +there should be. The individual gradually develops from the +embryo into a perfect form, though it becomes nothing else than +what it had formerly been in its embryonic state. Mankind advances +rapidly in civilization; we no longer ride in the rumbling +stage-coach but in a comfortable express train, and the tallow +candle has been replaced by the electric light. Thus we demand +progress also in knowledge and science, and even in religion. +Many things that were obscure to older generations have become +clear to us; we have corrected many an error, made many discoveries +which were unknown to our ancestors. Many doctrines +of faith, also, appear to our eyes in sharper outlines than before; +of many we have a deeper understanding, discovered new relations, +meanings, and deductions. Thus there is progress and +development everywhere. +</p> + +<p> +But it would be erroneous to conclude from all this that there +cannot be any stable truths and dogmas, that progress to new +and different views and doctrines is necessary. By the same +right we might conclude that the main principles of the +Copernican system cannot be immutable, because they would +<pb n='160'/><anchor id='Pg160'/> +hinder the progress of science. Progress certainly does not +consist in throwing away all certainty acquired, in order to begin +anew. Or does it really belong to progress in astronomy to +again give up <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, to go back to <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi> and let the +sun and all the stars revolve again around the earth? Does not +progress rather consist in our studying these astronomical results +more closely, in building up the details, and, first of all, in trying +to solve new problems? +</p> + +<p> +The champion of the faith will reply: Just as established +results do not hinder the progress of science, just so do the +doctrines of faith not form an obstacle to progress and evolution. +The fixed doctrines of the faith themselves, in themselves +and in their application to the conditions of life, offer rich +material for the growth of religious knowledge. And there is +the immense field for progress in the profane sciences. If any +one should say that the believing scientist, who is bound by his +dogmas, can do nothing further but reiterate his old truths, one +might in turn argue: Then the astronomer bound by the fundamental +rules of the Copernican system could have only the +monotonous task of drawing over and over again the outlines of +his system, while the mathematician who holds the multiplication +table to be an unalienable possession would not be allowed to +do aught but to repeat the multiplication table. +</p> + +<p> +Or the argument may be put thus: We have made great +progress in the material province of civilization, in science +and art; <q>can an old religion suffice under these new and improved +conditions, a religion which originated at an age when +these conditions did not exist? This contradiction is shocking.... +Progress in culture demands progress in religion.... We +want a more perfect religion, a higher religion</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Masaryk</hi>, Im +Kampf um die Religion, 1904, 29). Note the logic of this +demonstration. We no longer light our rooms by the dim light +of a small oil lamp, we walk no longer at night through dark +narrow lanes, but through brightly illuminated avenues, does +it follow from this that it can no longer be true that Christ is +the Son of God, nor that He has worked miracles, or founded +a Church, and a new religion is therefore necessary? We have +made progress in our knowledge of history; we know a good +<pb n='161'/><anchor id='Pg161'/> +deal of Rome and Carthage, of the civilization of ancient +Egypt and of Greece, and of their mutual relations; we have +other fashions of life than our fathers had, we build and paint +differently—our political life, too, has grown more complicated; +does it follow from all this, that it cannot be true that we are +created by God, that we must believe a divine revelation, +hence a new religion is necessary? Progress and evolution to +consist in ever abandoning the old and advancing to new and +different views—this is <emph>absurd</emph>. Absurd, in the first place, +because it is no <emph>progress</emph> at all, but a retrogression, a hopeless +alternation of forwards and backwards. There can be no +progress if I am always withdrawing from my old position; +progress is possible only by retaining the basis established and +then advancing therefrom. And <emph>evolution</emph> is not a continuous +remodelling and shaping anew, but a continuance in growth. +Evolution means that the embryo unfolds, and by retaining +and perfecting the old matter gradually becomes a plant; +evolution is in the progress from bud to blossom; but not in +the changing mass of clouds, swept away to-day by the current +wind and replaced to-morrow by other clouds. An absurdity, +also, for the reason that it violates all laws of reason, +that once there was a revelation of God to be believed, but that +this is no longer true. +</p> + +<p> +Furthermore, the demand to follow always <q>the ideas of the +period</q> suggests the question: Who is to represent the period? +Who represented Greece, the sophists or <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>? Who was representative +of the first days of Christianity, the Roman emperors +or the martyrs? Will not the passage in <hi rend='italic'>Goethe's</hi> Faust +apply in most cases: <q>What they call the spirit of the times is +but their own mind wherein the times are reflected</q>? True, if +progress is taken to be the overstepping by human reason of the +eternal standards of immutable truth and the barriers of faith, +if it is to be the attempt at emancipation from God and religion, +then there is no more resolute foe of progress than the Christian +religion, than the Catholic Church. But this is not progress +but loss of the truth, not higher religion but apostasy, not development +of what is best in man, but retrogression to mental +disintegration by scepticism. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='162'/><anchor id='Pg162'/> + +<div> +<head>The Syllabus.</head> + +<p> +In the eyes of many it is especially the Syllabus of <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> +by which the Catholic Church has erected a lasting monument to +its enmity to civilization. It is the Syllabus, we are told, in +which <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> has <q>ex cathedra condemned the freedom of +science</q> (<hi rend='italic'>W. Kahl</hi>, Bekenntnissgebundenheit und Lehrfreiheit, +1897, 10); <q>in which modern culture and science is being +cursed</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Th. Fuchs</hi>, Neue Freie Presse, Nov. 25, 1907); in +which <q>the most general foundations of our political order, the +freedom of conscience, are rejected</q> (<hi rend='italic'>G. Kaufmann</hi>, Die Lehrfreiheit +an den deutschen Universitaeten, 1898, 34); <q>in which +it has simply anathematized the achievements of the modern +concept of right</q> (<hi rend='italic'>F. Jodl</hi>, Gedanken über Reformkatholizismus, +1902, 5); the Syllabus <q>strikes blows against the autonomy +of human development of culture, it is a <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>non possumus</foreign>, I cannot +make peace, I cannot compromise with what is termed progress, +liberalism, and civilization.</q> The Syllabus is a favorite stock +argument of professional free-thinkers and agitators, and the +one with which they like to open the discussion. For this reason +we must say a few words about it. +</p> + +<p> +When a Syllabus is spoken of without any distinction, the +Syllabus of <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> is meant. It is a list of eighty condemned +propositions which this Pope sent on December 8, +1864, to all the Bishops of the world, together with the encyclical +letter <q>Quanta Cura.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> had, prior to this, and on +various occasions, denounced these propositions as false and to +be repudiated. They were now gathered together in the Syllabus. +They represent the <emph>program of modern liberalism</emph> in +the province of religion and in politics in relation to religion. +They are repudiated in the following order: Pantheism; liberal +freedom of thought and of conscience as a repudiation of the +duty to believe; religious freedom as a demand of emancipation +from faith and Church; religious indifferentism; the denial of +the Church and of her independence of the state; the omnipotence +of state power, especially in the province of thought. The +single propositions are not all designated as heretical, hence the +contrary is not always pronounced to be dogma; they are rejected +<pb n='163'/><anchor id='Pg163'/> +in general as <q>errors.</q> It is not necessary to discuss +here the question whether and to what extent the Syllabus is +an infallible decision. Suffice it to say it is binding for believing +Catholics. +</p> + +<p> +Has the Catholic any reason to be ashamed of the Syllabus? +</p> + +<p> +It was a resolute deed. A deed of that intrepidity and firm +consistency which has ever characterized the Catholic Church. +With her fearless love of truth the Church has in the Syllabus +solemnly condemned the errors of the modern rebellion against +the supernatural order, of the naturalization and declaration +of independence of the human life. For this reason the Syllabus +is called an attack upon modern culture, science, and education, +upon the foundations of the state. Is this true? +</p> + +<p> +It is, and it is not. All that is good and Christian in modern +culture is not touched by the Syllabus; it strikes only at +what is anti-Christian in our times and in the leading ideas +of our times. It does not condemn freedom of science, but only +the liberal freedom which throws off the yoke of faith; it does +not repudiate freedom of religion and conscience, but the <emph>liberal</emph> +freedom which will not acknowledge a divine revelation +nor take the Church as a guide. Not the foundations of modern +states are attacked, but only the liberal ideas of emancipation +from religion, and of opposition to the Church. The Church +proclaims to the world only what has been known to all Christian +centuries, that, just as the single individual is bound to +have the Christian belief and must lead a Christian life, so are +nations and organized states; that the human creature is subject +to the law of Christ in all its relations. Nor does she contend +against genuine progress in science, education and in the material +domain, but merely against liberal progress towards the +irreligious materialization of life. +</p> + +<p> +This emancipation from the Christian faith poses mostly +under the attractive and deceptive name of <q>modern progress.</q> +Indeed, it has ever been the pretension of liberalism +to look upon itself as the sole harbinger of civilization, to claim +the guidance of intellectual life for its aim, and to stigmatize +as a foe of culture any one that opposes the dissemination of +its anti-Christian humanism. It is also an expert in giving +<pb n='164'/><anchor id='Pg164'/> +to words a charm and an ambiguous meaning that deceive. +Emancipation from religion is <q>progress</q> and <q>enlightenment.</q> +Everything else is reactionary. Its infidelity is freedom +of conscience and thought. Everything else is <q>bondage.</q> Only +its secular schools, its civil marriage, its separation of Church +and State are <q>modern.</q> Everything else is obsolete, hence no +longer warranted. For the Church to defend her rights is arrogance; +when the Church uses her God-given authority for the +good of the faith, she practises intellectual oppression; the +Catholic who lets himself be guided by his Church is called +unpatriotic, bereft of his civil spirit. +</p> + +<p> +What striking contrast to the honesty in which the Church +presents her doctrines frankly before the whole world, without +disguise or artifice. The reason is that she has sufficient interior +strength and truth to render it unnecessary for her to take +refuge in disguise or present the truth in ambiguity. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The clearest evidence of the Church's hostility to culture is the +condemnation of the 80th thesis of the <emph>Syllabus</emph>, so it is said. It is +the thesis that the Pope can and must reconcile himself to, and compromise +with, progress, liberalism, and modern civilization. This +is a condemned proposition, hence the contrary is true: the Pope of +Rome cannot, and must not, reconcile himself, nor compromise with, +liberalism and modern civilization. Here we have the frankly admitted +hostility against progress, education, and science—it is the +watchword of the Papacy. +</p> + +<p> +This conclusion can be arrived at only by pushing aside all rules +of scientific interpretation. What progress is this, with what civilization +can the Papacy not be reconciled? The progress of modern +liberalism. The heading of the paragraph containing this proposition +states expressly that <q>errors of modern liberalism</q> are to be condemned. +This becomes clear by the Allocution <q>Jamdudum cernimus</q> +of March 18, 1861, from which this condemnation is taken. There +it is stated: <q>It is asked that the Pope of Rome reconcile himself with +progress, to liberalism as they call it, to the new civilization, and +compromise with them.... But now we ask of those inviting us to +be reconciled with modern civilization, whether the facts be such as +to tempt the Vicar of Christ on earth ... to connect himself with +the civilization of to-day without the greatest injury to this conscience +... a civilization that has caused the dissemination of numerous +despicable opinions, errors, and principles in conflict with the Catholic +religion and its doctrines.</q> Of course a civilization cut off from any +true Christianity by education and science, by family life and political +life, a progress, trying to stop the activity of the Church in every +sphere and attacking her in their speech, in newspapers, and in schools, +<pb n='165'/><anchor id='Pg165'/> +cannot demand of the Papacy to join hands with them. No Christian, +whether Catholic or Protestant, can profess this <q>progress.</q> We have +here at the same time a specimen of how they proceed in interpreting +the propositions of the Syllabus in order to discover in them all +possible absurdities. Many propositions are short sentences taken +from the work of an author, or from previous Papal declarations. +Hence they must be understood in the sense of those sources. Furthermore, +attention must be paid to what is specially emphasized. Then, +again, we must remember that by repudiating a proposition only the +contradictory is asserted, but not the contrary; to conclude this would +be to conclude too much. For instance, the seventy-seventh condemned +proposition reads: <q>In our times it is no longer to any purpose that +the Catholic religion should be the sole religion of the state to the exclusion +of all other confessions.</q> According to some, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Frins</hi>, the +contradictory is thus formulated: <q>In our times also it is still to the +purpose....</q> According to others, however, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hoensbroeeh</hi> and +<hi rend='italic'>Goetz</hi>: <q>In our times also it is beneficial....</q> Thus while <hi rend='italic'>Hoensbroech</hi> +and <hi rend='italic'>Goetz</hi> make the ecclesiastical doctrine appear to read +that it would be beneficial to hold fast to the Catholic as the sole +religion of the state under all circumstances even to-day, the actual +opposite is the doctrine, that this may be yet to the purpose under +certain circumstances. While no reasonable man could object to the +latter, the former is eagerly exploited against the Church (<hi rend='italic'>Heiner</hi>, +Der Syllabus, 1905, p. 31, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>; cf. <hi rend='italic'>Frins</hi>, Kirchenlex, 2d ed., XI, 1031; +<hi rend='italic'>Hoensbroech</hi>, l. c. 25; <hi rend='italic'>Goetz</hi>, Der Ultramontanismus, 1905, 148). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Of course it may be taken for granted that the Syllabus is +distasteful to modern liberalism, which is branded there as +one of the errors of the day. Yet the Church cannot be censured +for not becoming unfaithful to her vocation of preserving +the patrimony of Christianity to mankind, or for acting as the +invincible defender of the Christian religion in the universal +struggle between truth and error, even though the latter pose +with great assurance. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Condemnation of Modernism.</head> + +<p> +The great excitement caused in intellectual circles by the +Syllabus of <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> was aroused again, though not with the +same intensity, when some years ago the news of another Syllabus +was circulated through the world, and the excitement increased +when the rumour was followed by the publication of the encyclical +<q>Pascendi Dominici gregis.</q> Indeed, the new event was +not very unlike the former: in the 60's Rome's sentence was +<pb n='166'/><anchor id='Pg166'/> +directed against the Modernism of that period, which called itself +liberalism. The excitement caused by its condemnation was +more intense, because it struck directly at the principles governing +the liberal politics against the Church, which principles were +claimed to be the foundation of the modern state. Now the +Modernism repudiated by the Church's voice was nothing more +than the old humanistic, fundamental, errors of liberalism, +but put in the form of a religious and philosophical view of +the world, and in Catholic garb: it meant man detached from +everything supernatural, and dependent alone on himself in his +intellectual life, more especially in his religious life. +</p> + +<p> +Now, as then, similar charges were raised: The Church +is the irreconcilable foe of modern achievements and the opponent +of them; <q>the encyclical aims at modern intellectual +life in all its phases and forms</q> (XX. Jahrh., 1908, 568). +Now, as then, we have the same ambiguity of the terms <q>modern</q> +and <q>progress.</q> +</p> + +<p> +What was condemned by the Church? The document <q>Lamentabili +sane exitu,</q> issued by the teaching authority of the +Church on July 3, 1907, is entitled <q>A Decree of the Holy +Congregation of the Roman and General Inquisition or the +Holy Office,</q> which has to watch over the unadulterated preservation +of the faith. The decree soon was christened the <q>New +Syllabus,</q> because of its similarity with the Syllabus of +<hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> In a similar way it condemns sixty-five propositions +against the inspiration and the historical character of Holy Scripture, +against the divine origin of revelation and of faith, against +the divinity of Christ, His Resurrection and His atoning death, +against the Sacraments, and against the Church. These are +component parts of the philosophical religious system of thought +which soon after was set forth and condemned by the encyclical +<q>Pascendi,</q> of September 8, 1907. +</p> + +<p> +Modernism is essentially philosophy, combining modern +<emph>agnostic-autonomous subjectivism</emph> with <emph>evolutionism</emph>, and +applied to the Christian religion, which thereby becomes disfigured +beyond recognition. Its chain of thought, excellently +stated by the encyclical, starts with the proposition that the +supernatural is beyond the knowledge of man, and hence man +<pb n='167'/><anchor id='Pg167'/> +cannot know anything of God. The faith which unites us to +God is nothing but a feeling, born of a blind impulse, which +may be considered a divine revelation. If this religious feeling +is expressed in forms, the result is <q>doctrines of faith</q>; for +Christian <q>dogmas</q> are this and nothing more, images and +symbols of the noble and divine, hence they are of human +origin and are changeable according to the disposition and the +degree of learning of the individual, as well as of the times. +There is no dogmatic Christianity, in the sense of an immutable +religious doctrine, nor is there any absolutely true +religion, for religion is but a variable feeling, that has nothing +to do with cognition and knowledge. For this reason they never +can come in conflict. The Christian religion originally was +nothing else but the religious experience of Christ, who was +not God but a man; in the course of time it has undergone +changes which are reflected in the shaping of Christian dogma. +Holy Scripture is, similarly, the expression of the religious experience +of its human authors; the Sacraments are symbols, +arousing religious sentiments; the Church is not founded by +God, and only has the task of regulating the development of +Christianity, and of sanctioning at any time whatever religious +experiences the changeable spirit of progressive civilization may +produce. +</p> + +<p> +This is Modernism, as represented chiefly in France, Italy, +and to an extent also in England; in Germany it did not appear +as a system, but even there its spirit became quite apparent. +Thus, Modernism is nothing else but the systematic arrangement +of those ideas which we have hitherto met, in various places, as +the fundamental principles of modern religious thought opposed +to Christianity. It is subjectivism with its autonomy +of the human subject, its agnosticism, its relativism of truth, +sailing under the name of <q>historical method of thought</q> and +<q>progress,</q> and, finally, with its freedom of thought and conscience +which rejects all authority. It is <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> in the robe of +a Catholic theologian. Ultimately it is nothing else but the +shocking negation of everything supernatural, hence complete +apostasy. <q>The salient point is recognized,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Troeltsch</hi>, +<q>the enemy is the modern historical method of thought, the +<pb n='168'/><anchor id='Pg168'/> +concept of evolution, the theory of inner experience and relativism +as applied to religion, the negation of supernaturalism as +taught by the old Church</q> (l. c. 22). Hence, was it not manifest +that the Church had to take measures against this positive +denial of Christianity as a whole, the more so as the uneducated +could be easily deceived by it? Every organism will throw off excrescences, +the more energetically the stronger it is. Any religion +lacking this strength is doomed. That the Papal declaration +aroused such opposition must not be wondered at; it hit once +more the central idea of the anti-Christian view of the world. +The judgment was not passed against modern intellectual life, +but only against the grave errors inherent in it; the Church did +not condemn progress, nor the increase and deepening of knowledge +of the truth; not the enrichment of the life of the mind, +of feeling, and the will, but only pretended progress; she did +not condemn the historical method nor the idea of evolution, +but their false application, which dissolved anything and everything +in growth, purely natural growth at that, without acknowledging +a revelation of absolute truths. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Orthodox Protestants have openly praised this bold deed of the +Pope as highly meritorious for the preservation of the Christian faith. +Thus the South African Church Quarterly Review (Episcopal) of January, +1908, said: <q>The Syllabus and Encyclical of <hi rend='italic'>Pius X.</hi> against Modernism +are deserving of the respectful consideration of all Christians.... +At the present stage of history the opposing factors are driving with +great speed towards a fierce and resolute struggle between Christ and +anti-Christ. All who sincerely love Christ, our Lord, must rally under +one flag.... Narrow-minded hostility towards the Pope must give way +to the desire to be united with the great community which is fighting +so valiantly for the old faith of our fathers.... One must be blind, to +misjudge the tremendous influence exerted by the last deed of the +Pope in favour of the faith.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Even the Evangelical <q>Kirchenzeitung</q> admitted that the encyclical +is <q>directed chiefly against the more or less unchristian modern views +of the world ... which we must combat.... Undoubtedly it is not +only the Pope's right to lay bare the unchristian tendency of these +ideas and their incompatibility with the Christian faith, but it is +also his duty and his merit</q> (November 29, 1908, n. 48). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Puny men, entangled in the ideas of their time and surroundings, +are easily led to take for their standard the +thoughts and actions of their age. They often imagine that +<pb n='169'/><anchor id='Pg169'/> +they possess not a little strength and independence, when they +are intellectually entirely dependent and unable to rise above +their time. <q>It is the fashion, others think that way, therefore +I must think so, too</q>; these are often the principles of +their wisdom, and they ask the Church to do likewise. The +Church, however, looks back upon a long history, and numerous +ideas and opinions she has seen arise and vanish. And whoever +can look back upon a great experience, and moreover carries in +himself the call to lead the times, feels no restless impulse to +be carried away by changing doctrines. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Index.</head> + +<p> +Whenever the subject of Rome's enmity to science and +progress of culture is discussed, there invariably appears on the +scene, beside Syllabus and <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, also the Index. The latter +is held by many to be Rome's permanent means of hindering +the progress of humanity in general, and the free scientific +activity of the Catholic in particular, and to annihilate the +freedom of teaching and learning (<hi rend='italic'>Hoensbroech</hi>, Die Kath. +theol. Fakultaeten, 1907, 40 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). They say <q>the Congregation +of the Index has no pity nor consideration for the +classical works of literature, and condemns in the name of religion +the most admirable products of the human intellect</q> +(Grande Dict. univ. du XIX. siècle, IX, 640, apud <hi rend='italic'>J. Hilgers</hi>, +Der Index der Verb. Buecher, 1904, 166; much of what we +shall say on this topic is taken from this work by <hi rend='italic'>Hilgers</hi>). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This statement again reminds that the accusations against the +Catholic Church and her institutions are to be considered with caution, +because of the ignorance of her opponents in Catholic things. This is +especially true of the Index. Thus the above assertion is false. <hi rend='italic'>Dante's</hi> +<q>Divina Commedia</q> (the work referred to) is neither forbidden nor +needs approval nor correction: of the classical literature of the world +little or nothing is forbidden; even morally offensive books, that are +considered classical, may without ecclesiastical permission be read for +the sake of their elegant diction, whenever their reading is required +by one's work or duty of teaching. +</p> + +<p> +A few examples of the <emph>incredible ignorance</emph> alluded to will suffice. +In the <q>Grande Dictionnaire Universel du XIX. Siècle</q> it is actually +stated that the works of <hi rend='italic'>Albert the Great</hi> were condemned by a decree +of April 10, 1666. What does the Index really forbid? It states: <q><foreign lang='it' rend='italic'>Alberto +<pb n='170'/><anchor id='Pg170'/> +Magno, diviso in tre libri, nel primo si tratta della virtu delle +herbe, nel secondo della virtu delle pietre, e nel terzo della virtu di alcuni +animali.</foreign>—Albert the Great, in three parts: the first treats of the +virtue of plants; the second, of the virtue of stones; and the third, +of the virtue of some animals.</q> It is the title of a little superstitious +book, attributed to <q>Albert the Great</q> by an unknown author. +</p> + +<p> +The first edition of the Index of <hi rend='italic'>Leo XIII.</hi> in 1900 was sold out +in less than a year; a second edition followed in 1901, and, like the +first, could be had at all booksellers, at a very moderate price. In +December, 1901, there appeared in the Anglo-American weekly, <q>The +Roman World,</q> an article which says that it is difficult to obtain this +list of notorious books forbidden to Catholics, unless one be a Church +official, since only a few copies are printed and even these are not +handled by general book-dealers; hence that no details could be given +about the purchase of the copy referred to; but it was quite evident that +it had commanded a good price. <q>The copy in question, a model of fine +printing, might be worth about $40 to $50, but owing to its rareness, it +had undoubtedly cost $400. The history of this famous Index is interesting. +The one who first hit upon the idea was <hi rend='italic'>Charles V.</hi> of Spain, +about 1550. The first compilation of the book-list was made by the university +of Louvain in 1564, Pope <hi rend='italic'>Paul IV.</hi> assuming the direction of +the edition. It remained for 357 years in the hands of the Pope.</q> +Every one of these statements is false. And just as false is the statement +that the <q>Syllabus condemns not only a book written by a Pope, +but by Pope <hi rend='italic'>Leo XIII.</hi> himself.</q> Still it could not surprise us, since +even David's psalter is on the Index! When the Index of <hi rend='italic'>Leo XIII.</hi> +was published, Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Max Claar</hi> wrote from Rome to the <q>Neue Freie +Presse</q> of Vienna: <q>On the old Index we find among other things +the Psalms of King David and the Divina Commedia of <hi rend='italic'>Dante</hi>.</q> We +have already stated that the latter was never on the Index. But how +in the world could this man find Holy Scripture condemned on the Index? +Perhaps he found this passage: <q>Il salmista secondo la biblia</q> +and <q>Salmi (sessanta) di David.</q> The first is a superstitious booklet, +the second is a translation of sixty Psalms of David by the heretic, +<hi rend='italic'>Giovanni Diodati</hi>. The learned doctor in all seriousness mistook them +for the Psalms of David (<hi rend='italic'>Hilgers</hi>, 167, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +What then is the Index, and how is it to be judged? +</p> + +<p> +Ever since the Apostle of the Nations had at Ephesus the +superstitious books burned under his eyes, the Holy Fathers, +Bishops, and Councils since the first centuries of Christianity +have been careful to keep from the faithful writings hurtful to +faith and morals. Thus even in the olden time we find several +catalogues of forbidden books, then followed the Indices of the +Middle Ages. In the year 1571 a special Congregation of +Cardinals was formed, the <q>Congregation of the Index,</q> +which has ever since had charge of the ecclesiastical book-laws. +<pb n='171'/><anchor id='Pg171'/> +The last edition of the Index, obligatory for the whole +Church, emanated from <hi rend='italic'>Leo XIII.</hi> The title of the work +now in force reads, <q>The Index of Forbidden Books, revised +and published by order of and in the name of Leo XIII. +1900.</q> It is divided into two parts. The first and shorter +part contains the general book regulations, giving in short +paragraphs the rules on various classes of forbidden books, the +permission required for reading them, the examination to be +made previous to the publication of certain books. The second +part enumerates the writings forbidden by special decree—the +Index in the particular sense, and the part most often considered. +But it is second in importance to the first, because by far not +all books dangerous to faith and morals are named in it. Most +such books are forbidden by the general laws contained in the +first part, without mentioning the many which are forbidden +by mere common sense. +</p> + +<p> +Ecclesiastical legislation on books is composed of two factors: +first, the previous censorship—certain books must be examined +by ecclesiastical authority before their publication. +Second, the prohibition of books already published. +</p> + +<p> +The previous scrutiny in general is delegated to the Bishop; +all books dealing with morals and theology must be submitted. +The license to print the book is to be given if the +book is in accord with the teaching of the Church, in so far +as determined by ecclesiastical authority, the decision based +on it rests solely with the censor; if the author of the book +should fail to see that the passages objected to need revision +he may try to clear himself by stating his reasons; however, +he is also free to submit his work to another Bishop and +to look for a printer in the latter's diocese. If one looks over +the numerous books bearing the ecclesiastical imprimatur, he will +readily notice how much freedom is given, if the author keeps +within the doctrine of the Church. +</p> + +<p> +The <emph>condemnation</emph> of a book never strikes at the person +of the author, nor at what he has intended to express by the +passages objected to; judgment is passed only upon what is +actually expressed in them. Hence it is not necessary to give +to the author himself a hearing, or a chance to explain. +<pb n='172'/><anchor id='Pg172'/> +The reason is that the judgment is rendered on the sense of the +passages, not on the meaning of the author. In general those +books and periodicals are forbidden which are likely to do +serious damage to faith and morals. The isolated cases of +indicting the works of Catholic authors in the nineteenth century—we +may mention <hi rend='italic'>Lamennais</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hermes</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Guenther</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Loisy</hi>, +and <hi rend='italic'>Schell</hi>—show that the Church proceeds but slowly and with +consideration against the author involved. +</p> + +<p> +To appreciate the Index properly, one must try to grasp without +prejudice the <emph>purpose</emph> the Church has in view. This purpose +is to protect the faithful from error and from moral contagion, +and to preserve the faith intact. <q>What is more +precious than souls, what more precious than the faith? But +both suffer damage from such reading.</q> Such was the judgment +of the Council of Ephesus when it drew up its book-decrees; +such was the judgment of an <hi rend='italic'>Augustine</hi>, of <hi rend='italic'>Leo the +Great</hi>, and of the Holy Fathers; such is still the judgment of +the Church. Books and writings that offend against morals are +a menace to her faithful. They become infected with wrong +ideas; they are as a rule not in a position to distinguish by +themselves the false from the true, and for the most part they +are not morally strong enough to resist the allurements of error. +It may also happen that certain thoughts are true in the abstract, +yet for the time being would be a danger for many. +Now, it is the right and duty of any social authority, beginning +with the head of the family and up to the government, to protect +with strong hand the precious possessions of its subjects. +</p> + +<p> +The state keeps under control the sale of poison and dynamite, +keeps out contagious diseases from its boundaries—it +protects the possessions of its subjects. European states +have for centuries claimed the right to censure books, and +have used it much more rigorously than the Church ever +did, to say nothing of the censures of the Protestant Church +of former times (see abundant proof apud <hi rend='italic'>Hilgers</hi>, 206-402). +The modern state also, despite the great freedom granted to +the press, cannot entirely forego its sense of responsibility. It +restricts the freedom of the press by censorship, and by preventive +measures often not less drastic than the censure itself, and it +<pb n='173'/><anchor id='Pg173'/> +always regards the confiscation of particularly dangerous writings +to be a matter of course. It puts under censure school-books, +political posters, and theatrical plays, and does not tolerate any +socialistic literature in the soldiers' barracks. And do we not +take it as a matter of course if a father forbids his child to +associate with dangerous playmates, and takes bad books from +its hands? We cannot find fault with the Church if she seeks +to protect her children, if she represses the promiscuous dissemination +of false ideas and doctrines, and if she takes dangerous +books under her control. <q>Feed my lambs, feed my +sheep,</q> was the command given to the Church. +</p> + +<p> +The objection should therefore not be made that <q>such precaution +is proper when dealing with children but not with men; +especially since the thinking elements among the Catholics of +the Germanic tongue or origin are too profound and firm in +their faith to warrant a fear of the effects of unrestricted free +research</q> (from the petition of the so-called <q>Index-league</q> +of Muenster). This perusal may become dangerous even for +highly educated men, else how could Modernism break so +forcefully into the Church? Manifestly only because learned +theologians did not possess that firmness of Catholic faith +and Catholic knowledge which would prevent them from +being deceived by the misleading ideas of modern philosophy, +and of the new Protestant theology. Moreover, all forbidden +books may be read upon obtaining the necessary permission. +</p> + +<p> +<q>Preserve the deposit of faith,</q> the Church has been told. +She cannot look on silently when her doctrines are being +falsified and denied, when the most venerable sphere of theology +is made the stamping ground for immature minds and +a laboratory for all kinds of experiments. When <hi rend='italic'>Zola's</hi> novel, +<q>Rome,</q> had been put on the Index, the atheistic literary critic, +<hi rend='italic'>Sarcey</hi>, made the following comment: <q>If my own criticisms +of literature are regarded by many people as highest decisions, +why should a positive criticism be looked upon as monstrous just +because it comes from the Pope? It is my aim to guard good +taste in literature, and it is the aim of the Pope to guard the +true faith</q> (Allgemeine Rundschau, 1908, 828). Every social +authority must interfere when its foundations are attacked. +<pb n='174'/><anchor id='Pg174'/> +A church that tolerates false doctrines cannot be the teacher +that Christ sent to the nations. As a matter of fact the Index +has from the first helped in no small degree to keep the Catholic +doctrine pure, to induce caution in reading certain authors, +and to keep awake in the faithful that aversion against immoral +and irreligious writings which is the characteristic of +Catholics, and which has rescued the faith for thousands. +</p> + +<p> +To judge the Index fairly one must be convinced that the +preservation of true Christian doctrine is its highest aim. Then +the zeal of the Catholic Church will be intelligible. Of course, +he who thinks that the true weal of mankind consists in the +speedy emancipation from all Christian dogma, he who holds +the task of science to be the establishment of a new <q>scientific +view of the world,</q> he who no longer knows faith, will see in +the Index nothing but restraint. But, whoever is of a different +view will not take offence at the restriction of the freedom of +writing and reading when it is productive of higher good. +Freedom of science cannot be unrestricted, especially in regard to +teaching; the welfare of humanity must be considered. Moreover, +the Index concerns almost exclusively theology and some +branches of philosophy, the rest of the profane sciences but +little or not at all; the scientific works prohibited, however, are +not removed from scientific perusal: only permission is necessary, +and this is granted without difficulty and without cost. +</p> + +<p> +It is true, an error on the part of the Church authorities +is not impossible. We know of such a case, putting on the +Index the writings of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, in 1616. But just the circumstance +that history knows of but one such case of importance +is a clear testimony to the Holy Ghost's direction of the teaching +office even when it is rendering non-infallible decisions. +Besides, the damage that might result from a few mistakes +would not be so great as the damage resulting if everything +were allowed to be written and read. +</p> + +<p> +The Catholic scientist who appreciates the supernatural mission +of his Church will <emph>yield to her guidance in humble +confidence</emph>, he will practise this submission to the Church by +requesting permission for reading forbidden books, and by this +spirit he will obtain God's blessing on his work. +</p> + +<pb n='175'/><anchor id='Pg175'/> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In doing so he may recall to mind the edifying words of <hi rend='italic'>St. Francis +of Sales</hi>, in the preface to his treatise on the errors of the Lutherans +and Calvinists, where he gives the assurance of having conscientiously +asked for and received permission to read their writings. <q>We fervently +request our Catholic readers,</q> writes the Saint, <q>not to let +an evil suspicion against us arise, as if we had read the forbidden +books in spite of the prohibition of holy Church. We are able to +assure them in all truth of having done nothing forbidden to a good +Christian, and of having taken every precaution due in a matter +of so vast importance, so as not to incur in any way the very just +censures of the Church, nor in any manner to violate the profound +reverence we owe to her.</q> The permission granted him, dated July 16, +1608, is still extant; likewise one asked by <hi rend='italic'>St. Charles Borromeo</hi>. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The Catholic scientist also will readily ask the ecclesiastical +Imprimatur for certain of his works. If a careful author +before publishing a work submits the proofs to a friend of +his profession, taking his comment for a guide, why should +we deem it intellectual bondage if the Catholic scientist, in +matters of faith and morals, submits his work to the formal +approval of his Church, which to him is a higher authority +than any other? and does this willingly, as in consistency with +his Catholic conviction?<note place='foot'>At a certain Austrian university, where the custom obtains that +a member of a faculty of the university, in the regular order of the +faculties, publishes during the year a book on some study in its particular +branch, the turn came to the theological faculty. One of its members +then issued a work on moral theology, of course with the ecclesiastical +Imprimatur. Upon this being discovered the senate resolved not to +acknowledge the book as a university publication, nor to issue it as +such, as is usually the custom. They believed they saw in the Imprimatur +a degradation of science and a violation of its freedom—a +procedure entirely in accord with the traditional narrow-mindedness +and intolerance of liberalism.</note> +</p> + +<p> +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Via stulti recta in oculis ejus, qui autem sapiens est audit +consilia</foreign>, says the Wise Man. It is characteristic of the fool +to be wise in his own eyes, and stubbornly to cling to his +own judgment; but the prudent man seeks advice, and suffers +his attention to be called to his mistakes. +</p> + +<p> +The believing scientist, too, will submit to correction; should +the rare case fall to his lot to have the Church condemn his work, +he will know how to be generously obedient. Splendid examples +are blazing the way for him. <q>Were we to draw up a list of +the scientists, who, in a similar critical position as <hi rend='italic'>Fénelon</hi>, +<pb n='176'/><anchor id='Pg176'/> +found strength in the virtue of obedience, and on the other +hand a list of all those whose subjective scientific views did +not allow them to submit, then we should perceive at a glance +that their proud persistence in their own opinion has been injurious +to true wisdom in the same degree as humble submission +proved a benefit to science</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Hilgers</hi>, 412). Finally, he who +is convinced that the Christian faith is the greatest heritance +of truth from the past, which must be preserved in him, he will +take no offence if the Church is not impressed even by names +like <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi>, men much featured +as the captains of modern science and philosophy. In the eyes +of the Church nothing is genuine and true science that is contrary +to the testimony of God, and errors are errors even +then when their perpetrator is receiving cheers and applause. +Just as the state prohibits the physician from designedly assisting +any one to commit suicide, even though the physician be a +noted scientist, just so the Church opposes any one who assaults +God's truth, be he journalist or philosopher. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Frequently the <emph>great number of forbidden books mentioned by +the Index</emph> is pointed out. The Index of 1900 contains about 5,000 titles +belonging to the last three centuries; of these about 1,300 belong +to the nineteenth century. Quite a small number, considering the immense +literature of the world. Yet it will look even smaller when compared, +for instance, with the censure of books by the <emph>Prussian state</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +In the year 1845 there appeared the following catalogue: <q>Index +<hi rend='italic'>librorum prohibitorum</hi>, Catalogue of the books forbidden in Germany +during 1844-1845, first volume.</q> The second volume was issued +in 1846. The list is not complete: it does not contain, for instance, +the names of prohibited newspapers and periodicals. Yet it contains +437 writings, forbidden by 570 decrees, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, two or three times as many +as the entire number of German books of the nineteenth century enumerated +by name in the Roman Index. The <q>Historisch-Politischen Blaetter</q> +of 1840 contain an article beginning thus: <q><foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Veritas odium parit.</foreign> +In Prussia there are now prohibited nearly all Catholic journals and +periodicals, and in order to begin the matter <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>ab ovo</foreign> they have grasped +a welcome opportunity to throw interdicts at wholesale against works +not yet published, or to render their circulation difficult to a degree +amounting to prohibition.</q> +</p> + +<p> +How the Prussian censorship proceeded in those days may be illustrated +by another example. <q>At the time of the Vatican Council a +publisher, <hi rend='italic'>Joseph Bachem</hi>, came to Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Westhoff</hi>, rector of the Seminary +of Cologne, a man of venerable years, and told him of his misgivings +about the dogma of the infallibility. In his youth he had been taught +the maxim that that is Catholic which has been taught always, everywhere, +<pb n='177'/><anchor id='Pg177'/> +and by everybody; yet he had until recently never found the doctrine +of Papal Infallibility taught, neither in schools nor in text-books. +Then the reverend old rector took the visitor by the hand and led him +into the library of the seminary, where he showed him not less than sixteen +catechisms that had been in use in the Archdiocese of Cologne during +the eighteenth century, and which stated without exception, clearly +and convincingly, the doctrine of Papal Infallibility in matters of faith +and morals. The publisher in utter astonishment then asked how it was +that this doctrine was not taught in later editions. Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Westhoff</hi> referred +him to the Prussian censure, enforced until 1848, which had expunged +this doctrine from all Catholic catechisms. From that moment +<hi rend='italic'>Bachem</hi> no longer wavered in his opinions</q> (Koelnische Volkszeitung, +September 7, 1893). +</p> + +<p> +One may also remember <hi rend='italic'>Bismarck's</hi> press-campaign during the +<hi rend='italic'>Kulturkampf</hi>. Professor <hi rend='italic'>Friedberg</hi>, Prussian court canonist, instigated +this campaign, and in many ways devised the plan of attack. +This much-praised liberalism—how tyrannically it proceeded against +the Catholic press! The Frankfurter Zeitung in those days took a +census of convictions due to the press law. According to the census, +which <q>does not by far claim to be complete,</q> there were of newspaper +editors sentenced in 1875—21 in January, 35 in February, 29 in +March, 24 in April; in four months 137 newspaper writers were either +fined or sent to jail. During the same period 30 newspapers were confiscated +(Staatslexikon, IV, 550). This is not all. <q>We could mention +at least three instances,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>P. Majunke</hi> in his History of the Kulturkampf, +<q>where agents of the Berlin secret police have succeeded in obtaining +a position on the editorial staff of Catholic papers, staying for a +year or more. Besides serving as spies these fellows had to perform the +task of <foreign lang='fr' rend='italic'>agents provocateurs</foreign>, viz., to incite the editors of Catholic papers +to extreme utterances, similar to the denunciations suggested to correspondents +of foreign Catholic organs for their papers.</q> This happened +in a civilized state, despite its constitutional freedom of the press, +by order of the same liberalism which always pretends to be full of +righteous indignation when the Church prohibits books and puts them +on the Index. +</p> + +<p> +Towards the end of the last century, again with the aid of liberalism, +laws against the socialists were drawn up. After they had been passed +war was waged against socialistic literature. In the year 1886 there +appeared a real Index Librorum Prohibitorum, its title read, <q>Social +Democratic publications and societies prohibited by the imperial law +against the dangerous designs of Social Democracy,</q> which law had +then been in force eight years. A supplementary list was published two +years later, in 1888. <hi rend='italic'>Hilgers</hi> makes this comment on it: <q>How many +additional pamphlets have been condemned in the time from March 28, +1888, to September 30, 1890, we cannot state.</q> According to the foregoing +official statement the average is 130 a year. Hence we assume +that the printed matter prohibited during the twelve years that the +law was in force amounted to between 15,000 and 16,000. This number +of social democratic pamphlets forbidden within twelve years exceeds by +far the number of all books prohibited by the Roman Index in the course +<pb n='178'/><anchor id='Pg178'/> +of the entire nineteenth century—books that are the products of all +countries in the world and dealing with all branches; the number of +these German prohibitions is ten times that of Roman prohibitions. Indeed, +in the course of a year and a half the new German Empire prohibited +more writings of Germans than Rome had prohibited during the +entire past century. We may mention here <hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi>. In the atheism dispute, +at the end of the eighteenth century, decision was rendered upon +<hi rend='italic'>Goethe's</hi> advice against the philosopher <hi rend='italic'>Fichte</hi>; <hi rend='italic'>Fichte</hi> was discharged in +spite of petitions and mediations in his favour. The liberal Grand Duke +<hi rend='italic'>Karl August of Saxony Weimar</hi> granted in 1816, after the French conqueror +had been overthrown, freedom of the press. Professor <hi rend='italic'>Oken</hi> of +Jena availed himself of this privilege, and printed in his <q>Isis</q> contributions +complaining about the government. <hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi> had to advise what +should be done against it. He thought that the paper should have been +suppressed by the police at its very first announcement; <q>the measure +neglected at the beginning is to be taken immediately and the paper is +to be prohibited. By prohibiting the <q>Isis</q> the trouble will be stopped +at once</q> (Briefwechsel des Grossh. <hi rend='italic'>Karl August v. Sax.-Weimar-Eisenach</hi> +mit <hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi>, II, 1863, 90). And this was done, in spite of the +freedom granted the press. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi> is called the Royal Free-thinker; and yet the general introduction +of the book censure into Prussia occurred precisely during his +reign. The first general censure edict was issued in 1749 and remained +in force till the death of the king. All books, even those printed in +foreign tongues, were subject to the censure. Even all episcopal and +Papal proclamations were subjected to the royal censure. That the +leaders in the Reformation and their successors were not prevented +by their avowal of the principle of free research from exercising rigorous, +often tyrannical, censure, not only against the Catholics but also +against their fellow reformers, is well known. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>M. Lehmann</hi> writes in the Preuss. Jahrb. 1902: <q>It claims to be +infallible, this Papal Church, it wants to be to the faithful everything, in +science and even in nationality. It offends every nation. The Index +in the shape given it in 1900 by the present Pope proscribes the +<q>Oeuvres du Philosophe de Sanssouci,</q> <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> <q>Critique of Pure Reason,</q> +<hi rend='italic'>Ranke's</hi> <q>History of the Popes,</q> the greatest German king, the greatest +German philosopher, and the greatest German historian</q> (1902, no. 8). +</p> + +<p> +As to <hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi>, his own works appeared only after his death in +1788, and even then only in part; later on there were other editions. +None of these is put on the Index. On this list we find since 1760 the +<q>Oeuvres du Philosophe de Sanssouci.</q> Under this title appeared at +first three volumes, in but a few copies, intended for the most intimate +friends of the king. The first volume he soon withdrew and had +it burned of his own accord; it contained the <q>Palladion</q> an imitation +of Voltaire's <q>Pucelle,</q> a salacious work throughout. In 1762 a new +edition was issued. It also contains a philosophical treatise denying the +immortality of the soul; this treatise was also published separately +and specially prohibited in 1767. A third work put on the Index is a +spurious attack on the Popes published by order of King <hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi>, +with a preface by him. Its author is said to have been the French +<pb n='179'/><anchor id='Pg179'/> +abbé <hi rend='italic'>Jean Martin De Prades</hi>, reader to the king. These are the indicted +works of <hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi>, all written in French and in substance +French Voltairianism. Thus came the greatest German king on the +Index! +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Ranke's</hi> <q>Roemische Paepste</q> is on the Index, because the book +belittles the constitutions and doctrines of the Catholic Church: not +because of the true things the author says about Popes. <hi rend='italic'>Von Pastor's</hi> +<q>History of the Popes</q> is not on the Index, notwithstanding the bitter +truths he writes about Popes <hi rend='italic'>Alexander VI.</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Leo X.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +He who knows even the fundamental ideas of <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> <q>Kritik der +reinen Vernunft</q> will see that not only the Catholic Church, but every +Christian denomination, might forfeit its existence if it showed itself +indifferent towards it. Heresies are especially dangerous to the uneducated +when they bear the names of authors of scientific repute. +But the Church willingly grants the permission to read them when +there is reason for it. Moreover, it was not Rome alone that took steps +against <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>. This was done by the Prussian king <hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi> also. +One may recall his cabinet order, under minister <hi rend='italic'>Woellner</hi>, against +Kant's <q>Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft.</q> Similarly +the works of <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza</hi> were proceeded against, whereas his indictment +by Rome now calls forth protest because he has since been assigned a +prominent place among philosophers. <hi rend='italic'>Freudenthal</hi> registers a list of 500 +sharp prohibitions issued against <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza's</hi> works during the years 1556-1580: +they were condemned by the states of Holland, by the court, by +synods and magistrates. Those judgments were passed during a period +when the competent authorities had views different from those of to-day; +when the state deemed it its duty to oppose the undermining of Christianity. +The state's judgment has changed in many ways, Rome's judgment +has remained the same. But the works of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Spinoza</hi> likewise +have remained the same, and so is Christianity, against which they +occupy an irreconcilable position, still the same. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +<q>In the moral world nothing can support that cannot also +resist</q> is a truthful saying of <hi rend='italic'>Treitschke</hi>: it is also the principle +of the Catholic Church. Without ever surrendering to +the unchristian tendency of a time, she opposes error with unsubdued +courage. If this be intolerance, it is not intolerance +towards erring men but towards their errors, it is the intolerance +that the gardener shows in uprooting harmful weeds, it is the +intolerance of the physician towards disease. Obedience to the +Index makes high moral demands upon the Catholic. But it +has been characteristic of the Christian religion and of its faithful +children never to shrink before any moral action where it appeared +demanded. And if the preservation of moral purity exacts +conscientious discipline, this is also true of the preservation of +the pure faith, especially at a time when a neo-paganism in +<pb n='180'/><anchor id='Pg180'/> +league with an uncontrolled mania for reading is threatening +in many forms. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Galileo, and Other Topics.</head> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo Galilei</hi>—but few names have achieved equal fame. +Men like <hi rend='italic'>Alexander</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Cæsar</hi>, like <hi rend='italic'>Homer</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Dante</hi>, have +scarcely succeeded in writing their names with a sharper pencil +on the tablet of history than the astronomer of Pisa. His +grand discoveries in natural science have done little to crown +his temples with the wreath of immortality—it was the fate +of his life that did it. And one may add: if this fate had +been caused by the French government, or by a Protestant +General Assembly, he would never have obtained his position +in history; but since this lot came to him by the human +limitation of a Roman Church authority, his name is not only +entered on the calendar of the anti-Roman journalist, it also +stands surrounded with the halo of a Martyr in the esteem of +serious scientists, who see in <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> and in the consequent condemnation +of the Copernican system the proof that dogma and +science cannot agree, that the Catholic Church assumes a hostile +attitude toward science. Whenever this theme is mentioned, +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> ghost is paraded. For this reason we cannot pass by +this fact of history. To a son of the Church they are unpleasant +recollections, but this shall not keep us from looking +history firmly in the eye. +</p> + +<p> +There are some other charges brought forth from history, but +the <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> case overshadows them all. We shall touch upon +them but briefly, and then return to <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +Attention is called to the Church's condemnation of the +<emph>doctrine of Antipodes</emph>. The Priest <hi rend='italic'>Vigilius</hi> was accused in +Rome, in 747, of having taught that there exists another world +under the earth, and other people also, or another sun and moon +(<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>quod alius mundus et alii homines sub terra sint seu sol et +luna</foreign>). Such was his doctrine as stated by Pope <hi rend='italic'>Zacharias</hi> +in his reply to <hi rend='italic'>Boniface</hi>, the Apostle of Germany, in which he said +that he had cited <hi rend='italic'>Vigilius</hi> to Rome in order that his doctrine +be thoroughly investigated: if it should turn out that this had +<pb n='181'/><anchor id='Pg181'/> +really been taught by him, he would be condemned. Further +particulars of his teaching are unknown, because it is mentioned +only in the above passage. The assertion ascribed to him is +that there is another world besides this one, with other inhabitants +and with another sun and moon—an assertion scientifically +absurd and dogmatically inadmissible, as this might +call in question the common descent of mankind from one +pair of parents. The anxiety and rebuke of the Pope is +directed solely against the latter point. The condemnation of +<hi rend='italic'>Vigilius</hi> has never taken place, for he remained in his office, +won great respect, was elevated to the bishopric of Salzburg, +and later canonized by <hi rend='italic'>Gregory IX.</hi> Had a condemnation +of his particular doctrine taken place, this would not have involved +the condemnation of the antipodean theory, in the sense +that the side of the globe opposite to us is also inhabited by +human beings, a proposition which does not conflict with any +doctrine of faith. The doctrine described above has another +tendency. The entire case is hidden in obscurity (<hi rend='italic'>Hefele</hi>, +Conc. Gesch., 2d ed., III, 557 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Furthermore, it has been said that at the time when the +universities were in close union with the Church, medical science +could not advance because the Church had prohibited +human <emph>anatomy</emph> (Prof. <hi rend='italic'>J. H. van't Hoff</hi>, Neue Freie Presse, +December 29, 1907). In amplification it was said: <q><hi rend='italic'>Boniface +VIII.</hi> had forbidden every anatomical dissection of a body</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>O. Zoeckler</hi>, Theologie und Naturwissenschaft, 1877, I, 342). +What is true of this assertion? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In the first place, <hi rend='italic'>Boniface VIII.</hi> did not forbid anatomy. He merely +prohibited in 1299 and 1300 the hideous custom then prevailing regarding +the bodies of noblemen who had died away from home: they were disembowelled, +dissected, and boiled, for the purpose of removing the flesh +from the bones so that the latter could be transported the more easily. +This process had nothing to do with anatomy. The wish to possess the +bones of the dead did not seem to the Pope a sufficient reason for treating +the human body in such a way (Cfr. <hi rend='italic'>Michael</hi>, Gesch. des deutschen +Volkes III, 1903, 433). Nor does history know of any other prohibition +of anatomy by the Church. It tells us, however, that <hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi> in +his excellent rules for the benefit of his Sicilian kingdom in the regulation +of medical science among other things emphasizes the study of +surgery: he ordered that no one be allowed to practise surgery who +<pb n='182'/><anchor id='Pg182'/> +could not show by attestation of his professors that he had studied +surgery for at least one year, especially that he had learned at school +how to dissect bodies; a physician must be perfect in anatomy, else +he may not undertake operations (<hi rend='italic'>Michael</hi>, l. c. 430). This was done +and practised under the eyes of the Church. The accusers also seem +ignorant of the fact that bodies of those executed were given to universities +for dissection. In the year 1336 the medical students of Montpellier, +the famous medical school under the immediate direction of +the Church (see above, page 154) were granted the privilege of obtaining +once a year an executed criminal's body for dissection. The same +privilege was extended to the medical students of Lerida by King +<hi rend='italic'>Juan I.</hi> on June 3, 1391, who decreed that the delinquent should be +drowned <hi rend='italic'>pro speriencia seu anatomia fienda</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>Denifle</hi>, Die Universitaeten +des Mittelalters, I, 1885, 507). +</p> + +<p> +The story is also circulated that the fourth Lateran Council in +1215 prohibited monks from studying natural sciences and medicine +(Deutschoester. Lehrerzeitung 15th Dec., 1909). It will suffice to +quote this particular decree of the Lateran Council: <q>No clergyman is +allowed to pronounce capital sentence, nor to execute it, nor to be present +at its execution. No clergyman is allowed to draw up a document +concerning a death sentence: at the courts this should be done by laymen. +No clergyman is allowed to assume command of Rotarians (freebooters), +of archers or any others who shed human blood; no subdeacon, +deacon, or priest is allowed to practise that part of surgery by which cutting +and burning is done, nor must any one pronounce a benediction at +an ordeal</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Hefele</hi>, Koncil. Gesch., 2d ed., V, 1887, 887). This will thoroughly +dispose of that charge. +</p> + +<p> +Just as briefly may we settle the story of <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi> having been +excommunicated because of his intention to discover new lands. It is +said that the <q>Spanish clergy denounced his plans as against the faith, +and that the Council of Salamanca excommunicated him</q> (<hi rend='italic'>W. Draper</hi>, +ibid. 163). This is a fairy tale. The truth is, that King <hi rend='italic'>Ferdinand</hi> +and Queen <hi rend='italic'>Isabella</hi> referred the plans of the bold Genoese to a council +of scientists and ecclesiastical dignitaries, which was held in the Dominican +Monastery of Salamanca, <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi> being present. There never +was a Council of Salamanca. <hi rend='italic'>Weiss</hi> writes in his <q>History of the +World</q>: <q>Much has been surmised concerning the objections and their +refutation. It is only certain that the majority rejected the plan as +impossible of execution, and that <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi> won over a minority of +them, especially the priests, among whom the learned Dominican <hi rend='italic'>Deza</hi> +deserves mention</q> (Weltgesch. VII, 187). <hi rend='italic'>Denthofen</hi>, in his biography +of <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi>, says: <q>The Dominican Fathers supported him during the +long time the conference lasted, and even defrayed the expenses of his +journey. Father <hi rend='italic'>Diego de Deza</hi>, chief professor of theology, was convinced +by the reasons of <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi>, and in turn convinced the more +learned of his confrères. The majority, however, thought the idea but +a phantom, while others deemed it impracticable. The conference adjourned +without coming to any definite decision</q> (Christof Columbus, +Eine biographische Skizze ..., 1878, 21). <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi> found his +warmest friend in the learned Father <hi rend='italic'>Juan Perez</hi>, Guardian of the +<pb n='183'/><anchor id='Pg183'/> +Franciscan Monastery of St. Maria de la Rabida. Within the quiet +walls of this cloister <hi rend='italic'>Columbus'</hi> plans were disclosed for the first time +in Spain, and admired and resolved upon. <hi rend='italic'>Perez</hi> spoke untiringly to +Isabella in favour of the plan, and even aided <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi> in gathering +men for his crew. This is the fact about the anathema the Church is +paid to have pronounced on <hi rend='italic'>Columbus</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +But let us return to <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>.<note place='foot'>A clear understanding of the case of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> has been made +possible only since the year 1877, when the papers of the trial were +published by two men of opposite religious views,—the Catholic-minded +historian, <hi rend='italic'>de l'Epinois</hi>, and the liberal author, <hi rend='italic'>K. Gebler</hi>, who in 1876 had +already published a work on <q>Galileo Galilei and the Roman Curia,</q> +in the spirit of the anti-clerical tendency of the times. Yet, in spite of +his attitude, he was given free permission to copy the papers—a magnanimity +by which the Holy See has earned the gratitude and admiration +of every fair-minded lover of history. In more recent times, <hi rend='italic'>A. Favaro</hi> +published, in 1890-1907, a work of twenty volumes containing all the +papers relating to the trial of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, <q>Opere di Galileo Galilei, +Edizione Nazionale.</q> He, too, had access to the ecclesiastical archives, +which he acknowledges with thanks. It may be said now that the <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> +case has been settled by documentary evidence.</note> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo Galilei</hi>, the great Italian physicist, was born in +1564, at Pisa. At first he was professor in his native town, +then at Padua, where he taught the doctrine of <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi>, +although at that time there was no obstacle to accepting the +Copernican system. In 1611 he became mathematician at the +court of <hi rend='italic'>Cosimo II.</hi> at Florence. His talents and happy discoveries +soon won fame. In general he was more of a physicist +than an astronomer; his astronomical discoveries were, almost +without exception, of a kind that did not presuppose a thorough +astronomical training. As is known, he was not the original +inventor of the telescope, though with its aid he achieved some +of the most important of his discoveries; for instance, that of +the satellites of Jupiter. The telescope was invented in Holland. +</p> + +<p> +When he went to Rome, in 1611, he was received with great +honour. In one of his letters from there he wrote: <q>I have +received marked favours from many Cardinals and prelates +here, and from several princes. They wanted to hear of my +inventions, and were all well pleased.</q> The Jesuits gave a special +reception in his honour at the Roman College. This +shows in what esteem science was then held at Rome. But +<pb n='184'/><anchor id='Pg184'/> +five years later <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> returned to the Eternal City under +quite different circumstances. What had happened? In 1612 +he had issued a treatise on <q>The History and Explanation of +the Sun-spots,</q> in which he declared unreservedly for the +Copernican system. And this caused the change. True, +<hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> himself was a Catholic Priest, and had dedicated +his principal work to Pope <hi rend='italic'>Paul III.</hi> But it was generally +supposed that he had brought forward the doctrine only as +an hypothesis, only to illustrate and facilitate calculations, not +claiming for it absolute certainty. This assumption was based +on the preface of the first edition of his book, containing +assurance to that effect. That preface, however, was not the +work of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, but had been smuggled into the book by +the Protestant publisher <hi rend='italic'>Osiander</hi>, without the author's knowledge, +because <hi rend='italic'>Osiander</hi> feared <emph>his own</emph> church authorities. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> spoke in quite another tone. He defended the doctrine +as true. He soon aroused opposition. Men standing for +the geocentric theory were opposed by others, siding with <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> +for the solar system, such as the learned Benedictine, <hi rend='italic'>Castelli</hi>. +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> great bitterness and sarcasm in dealing with his +opponents aggravated the quarrel with the <q>partisans of <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>.</q> +Extreme irritability and love of praise were prominent +traits of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> character. +</p> + +<p> +It was the custom of that time to bring Scripture into controversies +about nature. This was done also in <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> case. +Passages were quoted against him, referring to the <q>rising and +setting sun,</q> to the <q>earth that never moves,</q> of <hi rend='italic'>Joshua's</hi> +<q>commanding the sun to stand still.</q> This prompted <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> +to cross over into the field of theology himself. In a letter to +<hi rend='italic'>Castelli</hi> in 1613 he says: <q>Holy Writ can never lie nor err; on +the contrary, its sayings are absolute and incontestable truth; +but its interpreters are liable to err in various ways, and it is +a fatal and very common mistake to stop always at the literal +sense</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, even prior to <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, had interpreted the respective +passages of the Scriptures properly and with surprising +skill; especially in his introduction to his <q>Astronomia nova.</q> +Cfr. <hi rend='italic'>Anschuetz</hi>, Johannes Kepler als Exeget. Zeitschrift für +katholische Theologie, XI, 1887, 1-24). +</p> + +<pb n='185'/><anchor id='Pg185'/> + +<p> +Correct as these arguments were, it was nevertheless imprudent +for the court mathematician to trespass upon grounds regarded +by theologians as their own, instead of furnishing natural +scientific proofs. Thus the matter was brought to Rome before +the Congregation of the Inquisition. <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, worrying about +his case, went voluntarily to Rome, in 1615. He failed +to assuage the opposition against his theory, though he says +he was received favourably by the princes of the Church. +Moreover, heedless of the admonition of his friends, he pursued +the matter with indiscreet zeal, with vehemence and impetuosity, +practically provoking a decision. Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Bellarmin</hi> +opposed the haste with which the matter was being pressed; +the Jesuit <hi rend='italic'>Grienberger</hi> thought that <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> should first set +forth his proofs, and then speak about the Scriptures. Had scientific +proofs been brought forth, theological difficulties would +have been easily cleared away; but scientific proof was lacking, +and what there perhaps was of it, <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> failed to offer. +</p> + +<p> +The right of the Congregation to take up the matter can +hardly be denied, for although the matter was one of natural +sciences, yet, by introducing theology and Scripture, it had +assumed the character of theology and exegesis. <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> personally +was dealt with very leniently. During the discussions +of 1616 he was never cited before the bar of the Inquisition, nor +was his exterior freedom in any way restricted. Only one thing +was done: he was cautioned by Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Bellarmin</hi>, <q>by order +of the Holy Congregation,</q> not to adhere to, nor teach any +longer, the Copernican theory. The documents of the case say +that <q><hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> submitted to this order and promised to obey.</q> +The Congregation of the Index prohibited, March 5, 1616, all +books defending the Copernican theory, declaring the doctrine to +be against Holy Scripture. Even the work of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> was +prohibited <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>donec corrigatur</foreign>—until it be corrected. A decision +of the year 1620 declared which passages should be +corrected. They are those in which the author speaks of his +theory not as an hypothesis but as of an established truth: +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>non ex hypothesi, sed asserando</foreign>. The Protestant <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, upon +hearing this, wrote: <q>By their imprudent acts some have +caused the work of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> to be condemned, after it had +<pb n='186'/><anchor id='Pg186'/> +been left unmolested for nearly eighty years; and the prohibition +will last at least till the corrections are made. I have been +assured, however, by competent authority, both ecclesiastical and +civil, that the decree was not intended to put any hindrance in +the way of astronomical research</q> (<hi rend='italic'>A. Mueller</hi>, J. Kepler, 1903, +105). The reproach of imprudence was intended for <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +To teach the doctrine as an hypothesis was permitted even +to <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, and this left the way clear for the development of the +hypothesis, because whatever showed the usefulness of the +hypothesis was sure to increase its value as a truth, but <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> +would not keep within these limits. Instead of showing in a +Christian spirit a submission to Providence, which even an erring +authority may demand, he openly violated his promise and +disobeyed the command he had received. In the spring of +1632 there appeared at Florence his <q><hi rend='italic'>Dialogue on the two +most important systems of the world</hi>.</q> It contained an +open, though by no means victorious, defence of the Copernican +system—seeking to hide under a confidence-inspiring mask. +It contained many passages of caustic sarcasm, with the evident +intention of arousing public opinion against the attitude of the +Roman Congregations. It was a flagrant <emph>violation of the +command given him personally</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The Pope under whom the proceedings against <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> took +place was <hi rend='italic'>Urban VIII.</hi>, who, when a Cardinal, had followed +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> discoveries with enthusiasm, though never partial to +the system of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, and, in accord with the custom of +the age, he had written an ode to <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +Cited to Rome, <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> came only after repeated urging, on +February 14, 1633. The story of his having been imprisoned +and tortured on this second visit to Rome is false. <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> +wrote on April 16 of that year: <q>I live in an apartment of +three rooms, belonging to the Fiscal of the Inquisition, and am +free to move in many rooms. My health is good.</q> This stay +in the apartment belonging to the Inquisition lasted but twenty-two +days; after that <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> was allowed to live in the palace +of the Ambassador of Tuscany. During his whole life <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> +was never even for an hour in a real prison. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> demeanour before the Inquisition bespeaks little +<pb n='187'/><anchor id='Pg187'/> +truthfulness and manliness. It makes a painful impression. +Many other events in his life cast dark shades of insincerity +upon his character, especially his relations with <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>. While +in his dialogue he openly defended the truth of the Copernican +system, while he had written, time and again, that the +theory had been demonstrated by <q>forceful, convincing arguments,</q> +whereas nothing but insignificant reasons could be +pleaded for the contrary, he now assumes the attitude before +the Inquisition of denying that he had championed that theory, +at least not consciously; that he had never taught that doctrine +otherwise than hypothetically. And this he asserts although +he had taken the oath to say nothing but the truth. We +even hear him declare that he considers the doctrine to be false, +and that he was ready to refute it at once. +</p> + +<p> +The judges were convinced of the untruthfulness of the defendant. +In those times, in order to obtain further confessions, +especially when the accused had been previously convicted of +guilt, torture was resorted to. This regrettable practice was +then in vogue at every European court; the Inquisition, too, +had adopted it, but strict rules were laid down to guard against +abuses. Very old persons were exempt from the rack; they were +only threatened with it. This happened also in <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> case, +he was never actually put on the rack. Moreover, one can +safely presume that this threat did not terrify him much. His +reading must have enlightened him on this point, and even +without it he must have known the practice by his active intercourse +with those theologians of the Curia who were friendly to +him. In fact, he clung obstinately to his denial, to the very end +of the hearing, although it must be surmised that he would not +have aggravated his case by confession. The commissioner of +Inquisition, <hi rend='italic'>Macolano</hi>, at the first stages of the trial had expressed +his hope that in this event <q>it would be possible to show +indulgence to the guilty, and whatever the result might be, he +would realize the benefit received, apart from all other consequences +to be expected from a desired mutual satisfaction</q> +(Letter to Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Barberini</hi>, April 28, 1633). +</p> + +<p> +On June 22 <emph>the final verdict</emph> was rendered: it told the +defendant: <q>Thou art convicted by the Holy Congregation +<pb n='188'/><anchor id='Pg188'/> +of being suspected of heresy, to wit, to have held for true, +and believed in, a false theory, contrary to Holy Writ—which +makes the sun the centre of the orbit of the earth, without +moving from east to west, and which lets the earth, on the other +hand, move outside the centre of the world, and to have +believed that an opinion may be considered probable and be +defended, though it had been expressly declared to be contrary +to the Scripture.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> was declared suspect of heresy, because, +in the opinion of the judges, he had assumed that a +doctrine in contradiction to the Scriptures might be defended. +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> retracted by oath. That upon retraction he arose and +exclaimed, stamping with his foot, <q><foreign rend='italic'>Pur si muove!</foreign></q> (<q>and +yet it does move!</q>) is a fable. He was sentenced to be jailed +in the Holy Office. But already the next day he was allowed to +go to the palace of the Grand Duke of Tuscany and to consider +that palace his prison. Soon after he departed for Siena, <q>in +the best of health,</q> according to the report of the Tuscan ambassador, +<hi rend='italic'>Niccolini</hi>, and there took up his abode with his +friend the Archbishop <hi rend='italic'>Piccolomini</hi>. After a lapse of five +months he was allowed to return to his villa at Arcetri, near +Florence, where he remained, with the exception of occasional +visits to Florence, till his death. Two of his daughters were +nuns in the nearby cloister of S. Matteo. His literary activity +was not suppressed by the surveillance of the Inquisition. His +lively and fertile mind, cut off from polemics, turned to the +completion of his researches in other directions. His lively +intercourse with friends and disciples, of whom many belonged +to various Orders, proved beneficial to him. In the year 1638 +he published his <q>Dialogue on the New Sciences,</q> which he +rightly pronounced to be his best effort, and by which he became +the founder of dynamics. His productiveness continued until +he became blind. +</p> + +<p> +We may say without fear of contradiction that, apart from +their theoretical error, the Roman Congregations had shown the +greatest indulgence towards one guilty of having broken his +pledge, and doubtless they would have been still more lenient +had <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, confirmed by flattering friends in his anger at +the supposed intrigues of his enemies, not himself made this +<pb n='189'/><anchor id='Pg189'/> +impossible; if he had not continued to propagate secretly his +views, verbally and in writing, which was bound to be discovered. +Considering all this, Rome's proceeding in the case appears +to be quite indulgent. Here the position was taken that +the spread of the doctrine would mean an imminent danger to +the purity of the faith. The unfortunate scientist died on January +8, 1642, at the age of seventy-eight years, fortified by the +holy Sacraments. <hi rend='italic'>Urban VIII.</hi> sent him his blessing. Undoubtedly +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> had nothing in common with the champions of that +unbelieving freedom of science, which now tries to lift him upon +its shield; notwithstanding his later bitterness he remained +to his death steadfast in his Catholic faith. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Comments on the Galileo Case.</head> + +<p> +The above is a brief history of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> conviction, and of +the occurrences leading to it. An event regrettable to all, a +stumbling-block for not a few; for others a welcome event +to make the Church appear in the light of an enemy of science. +Let us now give more particulars of the merits of the case. +</p> + +<p> +We have before us two decisions of Roman Tribunals: the +Index decree of 1616, announcing the rejection of the Copernican +doctrine and prohibiting books maintaining it, and the conviction +of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> in 1633 by the Congregation of the Inquisition. +It is freely admitted that these Roman Tribunals +committed an <emph>error</emph> in advocating an interpretation of the +Bible which was false in itself, and is to-day recognized as +false. +</p> + +<p> +Well, <emph>does this confute the infallibility of the +Church?</emph> It does not. The matter in point is merely an +error of the Congregations, of bodies of Cardinals, who were responsible +for the transactions and decisions. The Congregations, +however, are not infallible organs. There is no Bull or +Papal decree designating the Copernican doctrine as false, much +less is there extant a decision ex cathedra. Neither in 1616 +nor in 1633, nor at any other time, has the Holy See ever manifested +its intention of declaring, by a peremptory, dogmatic decision, +the new system to be against Scripture. +</p> + +<pb n='190'/><anchor id='Pg190'/> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It was thus the general understanding of that age that in the +present case there was no irrevocable dogmatic decision given. For +instance, the Jesuit <hi rend='italic'>Riccioli</hi>, wrote not long after the decision: +<q>Inasmuch as no dogmatic decision was rendered in this case, neither +on the part of the Pope nor on the part of a Council ruled by the +Pope and acknowledged by him, it is not made, by virtue of that +decree of the Congregation, a doctrine of faith that the sun is +moving and the earth standing still, but at most it is a doctrine for +those who by reason of Holy Writ seem to be morally certain that +God has so revealed it. Yet every Catholic is bound by virtue of +obedience to conform to the decree of the Congregation, or at least +not to teach what is directly opposed to it</q> (Almagestum novum, 1651, +162). <hi rend='italic'>Descartes</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Gassendi</hi>, and others of that time expressed themselves +similarly (<hi rend='italic'>Grisar</hi>, 165, <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). There is an interesting letter +of the Protestant philosopher <hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz</hi>, written to the Landgrave +<hi rend='italic'>Ernest of Hessia</hi>, 1688, begging him to work for the repeal of the +condemnation of the Copernican theory, because of the growing verification +of this theory: <q>If the Congregation would change its censure, +or mitigate it, as one issued hastily at a time when the proofs for +the correctness of the Copernican theory were not yet clear enough, +this step could not detract from the authority of the Congregation, +much less of the Church, because the Pope had no part in it. There +is no judicial authority which has not at times reformed its own +decisions.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +But have we here not at least a <emph>wilful attack on science</emph>? +or a manifestation of the Congregation's narrow-mindedness +and ignorance, which are bound to deprive it of all respect +and confidence of sober-minded people? +</p> + +<p> +This harsh judgment overlooks two points. In the first +place, the error of the judges was quite <emph>pardonable</emph>. Could +the liberal critics of to-day, who so harshly denounce the Cardinals +of the Congregation, be suddenly changed into ecclesiastical +prelates, and transferred back to the years of 1616-1633, +and placed in the chairs of the tribunal which had to decide +those delicate questions, it may be feared that, did they carry +into the decision but a part of the animosity they now show, +they would disgrace themselves and compromise the Church +even more than the judges of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> did. It is true that were +we to judge the handling of the question by the knowledge of +to-day, we might be astonished at the narrow-mindedness of +the judges, trying to uphold their untenable views against the +established results of scientific research. But it would be altogether +unhistorical to look at the matter in that way. When +<pb n='191'/><anchor id='Pg191'/> +the Copernican theory entered upon the battlefield, it was <emph>by +no means certain and demonstrated</emph>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The real arguments for the rotation of the earth were not then +known. There were no direct proofs for the progressive revolution +of the earth around the sun. <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> advanced three main arguments +for his theory. First, he advanced the argument from the phenomenon +of the tides, which, he said, could not be accounted for but by the +rotation of the earth: an argument rejected as futile even at that +time. Next he argued from certain observations of the spots on the +sun: another worthless argument, which others, like <hi rend='italic'>Scheiner</hi>, looked +upon as proof of the older theory. The third argument was that the new +theory simplified the explanation of certain celestial phenomena; but +the scope of this argument, valid though it was in the abstract, could +not be expressed or grasped at the time, especially since the corrections +of <hi rend='italic'>Tycho de Brahe</hi> had removed the greatest objections to the Ptolemaic +system. The Copernican theory could not be considered certain till +the end of the seventeenth century, after <hi rend='italic'>Newton's</hi> work on gravitation. +</p> + +<p> +Then there were difficulties, the greatest of which was probably the +old idea of inertia, which at that time meant only that all bodies +tend to a state of rest; hence it seemed impossible that the earth +could ceaselessly execute two movements at the same time, around the +sun and around its own axis. This notion of inertia had not been +doubted in 1616; even <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> adhered to it. Later on <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> came +very near to the new idea of inertia: that bodies tended to retain +their state of repose or motion. But this new notion, like everything +else new, gained ground but slowly. Then it was only with great +difficulty that he could dispose of the objection that were the earth +to speed through space, as the new theory claimed, the atmosphere +would take a stormlike motion. Lastly, the philosophical objection had +to be met: the sun and other celestial bodies, as far as we can know +by observation, are moving; if they do not move, then we must admit +that we can know nothing by observation. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the new doctrine was not at all proven at that time, as could +be easily shown by its opponents; although it cannot be denied that +they did not always enter into the discussion with impartiality. The +astronomer, <hi rend='italic'>Secchi</hi>, testifies that <q>none of the real arguments for the +rotary motion of the earth was known at <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> time, also direct +proofs for the progressive movement of the earth around the sun +were lacking at that time</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Grisar</hi>, 30). Another famous astronomer, +<hi rend='italic'>Schiaparelli</hi>, writes: <q>In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the +Ptolemaic as well as the Copernican system could serve for the description +of phenomena; geometrically they were equivalent to each other +and to <hi rend='italic'>Tycho's</hi> eclectic system</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Schiaparelli</hi>, Die Vorläufer des Copernicus +im Altertum (German, 1876), 86). +</p> + +<p> +Hence no direct evidence could be pleaded against the decision of +the Congregation, not even <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> had that evidence. At any rate +no judge who observed his demeanour at the trial could have suspected +<hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> of coming in conflict with his conscience by swearing off the +theory. +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='192'/><anchor id='Pg192'/> + +<p> +For this reason it would be wrong to call <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> a martyr +for science, because he did not suffer any martyrdom. He has +seen neither rack nor prison. But he was not a martyr chiefly +for the reason that he could not have had any scientific conviction, +apart from the fact that he did not claim any such conviction, +even denied it expressly. +</p> + +<p> +No wonder, then, that the heliocentric system had considerable +opponents at that time; no wonder the opposite view was +even the prevalent one. <hi rend='italic'>A. Tanner</hi> wrote in 1626: <q><foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Ita habet +communis ac certa omnium theologorum ac philosophorum +naturalium sentia</foreign></q> (Theol. Schol. I, disp. 6, q. 4., dub. 3). +Had valid argument been brought forth there never would have +been a <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> case. In this respect a passage from a letter +of <hi rend='italic'>Bellarmin</hi> deserves attention: <q>If it could be really demonstrated +that the sun be in the centre of the world ... then +we would have to proceed quite cautiously in explaining the +apparently opposite passages in the Scriptures, we would rather +have to say that we do not understand them, than to say of +things demonstrated that they are false</q> (to <hi rend='italic'>Foscarini</hi>, April +12, 1615). The Cardinals of that time could not be expected +to anticipate the knowledge of a later period. They had to +consult the judgment of their contemporaneous savants. When +seeing the majority of them sharply rejecting the new theory +and refuting the arguments of their opponents, it is little +wonder that the Cardinals could not overcome their theological +scruples. +</p> + +<p> +The scruples arose from the opinion, then prevalent, that the +Holy Scripture taught that the earth stood still and the sun +moved; that the words of the Scripture must be taken literally +till the contrary is demonstrated. The unanimous explanation +of the Christian centuries was also cited. As a matter of fact, +however, the Christian past had not taught this to be the only +true sense of the words, but at that time the words were understood +that way, because no one could arrive at any other sense +in those days. +</p> + +<p> +Under these circumstances, an error was hardly avoidable, +if a decision was required. And a decision seemed to be urgent, +and this is the second point we must not overlook, if we wish +<pb n='193'/><anchor id='Pg193'/> +to judge fairly. It was a time eager for innovations, full of +anti-religious ideas. A renaissance, sidling off into false humanism, +was combating religious convictions, false notions were +invading philosophy; in addition, Protestantism was trying +to invade Italy. All this caused suspicion of any innovation +apt to endanger the faith; interpretations of the Scriptures +deviating from the accustomed sense were particularly distrusted. +The <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> quarrel happened at an inopportune time. +Indeed a sudden spread of the Copernican theory might have +been accompanied by great religious dangers. Even now, after +nearly three hundred years, the leaders of the anti-Christian +propaganda are still pointing out that the progress of natural +science has proved Holy Scripture to be erroneous, and many +are impressed by the argument; many thousands would have +been confused in those days by the sudden collapse of old +astronomical views that were connected with unclarified religious +ideas—dreading that victorious science might shatter all +religious traditions. Now, if one is convinced that the damage +to religion is to be estimated greater than any other, then +one may also have the conviction that it was better for the +nations of the new era to have their scientific progress a little +delayed, than to have their most sacred possession endangered. +Of course considerations of this kind will have no weight with +representatives of the naturalistic view of the world. Then it +can only be emphasized that a science that has no appreciation +of the supernatural character of the Catholic Church cannot be +in a position to render a fair judgment on many facts in the +history of that Church. +</p> + +<p> +What we have said shows sufficiently that the condemnation +of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> was not due to any hostility to science. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The idea that the Church's attitude towards <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> and the Copernican +theory was a result of her antipathy to science is entirely +in contradiction with the character of that strenuous period. In +Catholic countries, especially in Italy, intellectual life was zealously +promoted by the Popes and their influence. It was developing and +flourishing even in the natural sciences. When reading the correspondence +of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> one must be surprised to see how popular astronomical, +physical, and mathematical studies were in the educated +circles of the period. These studies belonged to the curriculum of +a general philosophical education, and it was a matter of honour +<pb n='194'/><anchor id='Pg194'/> +for many ecclesiastical dignitaries to remain philosophers in that +sense, notwithstanding their official duties. We recall to mind the +scientific discussion carried on with <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> in Rome in 1611 and 1616, +by Cardinals <hi rend='italic'>Del Monte</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Farnese</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bonzi</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bemerio</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Orsini</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Maffeo +Baberini</hi>, and by clergymen like <hi rend='italic'>Agucchi</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Dini</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Campioli</hi>. Similarly +in France we meet with names like <hi rend='italic'>Mersenne</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Gassendi</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Descartes</hi>. +And in Italy, after <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> and at his time, we meet with a long list of +eminent naturalists like <hi rend='italic'>Toricelli</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Cassini</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Riccioli</hi>, and others. In +1667 <hi rend='italic'>Gemiani Montanari</hi> could write that in Italy there were continually +forming new societies of scientists. The advance in knowledge +of truth was made on safe grounds; at Naples, Rome, and +elsewhere science was enriched by a great variety of new experiences, inasmuch +as the scientists were making progress in the observation and +the investigation of nature. <hi rend='italic'>Targioni-Tozzetti</hi> writes: <q>Astronomy +with us, about the middle of the sixteenth century, was a very diligently +cultivated branch of science</q> (Galileistudien (1882) 338 f.). The +Church was by no means hostile to this newly awakened life, not even +holding aloof from it; on the contrary, it flourished especially in ecclesiastical +circles; a proof that narrow-minded disappreciation of natural +science did not prevail, and that there was a different explanation for +the <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> case. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Copernicus on the Index till 1835.</head> + +<p> +And what of the fact that <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> remained on the Index +until the nineteenth century? Does it not show a rigid adherence +to old, traditional method and opposition to progress? +The fact is true: The work of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, and other Copernican +writings, remained on the Index until 1835. But it is also +true that a great deal connected with this fact is not generally +known or ignored. Let us mention here some of these facts. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +To begin with, it must not be forgotten that we owe the new world +system, and with it the turning-point in astronomy, first of all to +representatives of the Catholic clergy. After the learned Bishop +<hi rend='italic'>Nicholas Oresme</hi> had expressed with fullest certainty the most important +point of the Copernican system as early as 1377 (in a manuscript +hitherto unknown, discovered a short time ago by <hi rend='italic'>Pierre +Duhem</hi> in the National Library at Paris. Cfr. Liter. Zentralblatt +(1909), page 1618), and after the learned Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Nicholaus von +Kues</hi> (d. 1474) adopted a rotary motion of the earth in his cosmic +system, it was <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, a canon of the diocese of Ermland, who +became the father of the new theory, in his work <q>De evolutionibus +orbium coelestium.</q> He published it at the urgent request of Cardinal +<hi rend='italic'>Nikolaus Schoenberg</hi>. But the most zealous promoter of his +work was Bishop <hi rend='italic'>Tiedemann Giese</hi> of Kulm. Enthusiastic over the +novel idea, he incessantly urged his friend to publish his work, took +care of its publication, and sent a copy to Pope <hi rend='italic'>Paul III.</hi>, who accepted +<pb n='195'/><anchor id='Pg195'/> +its dedication. Again, it was a prince of the Church, Bishop +<hi rend='italic'>Martin Kromer</hi>, who, in 1851, dedicated a tablet in the cathedral +at Frauenberg to <q>The Great Astronomer and Innovator of Astronomical +Science.</q> All these men knew that <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> defended his +work not as an hypothesis or as fiction, but as true. Before <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> +issued his great work, <hi rend='italic'>Clement VIII.</hi> showed a lively interest in his +system and had it explained to him by the learned <hi rend='italic'>Johann Widmannstadt</hi> +in the Vatican Gardens (<hi rend='italic'>Pastor</hi>, Gesch. der Päpste, IV, 2 (1907) +550). +</p> + +<p> +The first attack against the new system, as being contrary to Holy +Writ, came not from Catholic but from Protestant circles. Among +the latter the opposition against <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> was being agitated, +while peaceful calm reigned among the former. Twelve Popes succeeded +<hi rend='italic'>Paul III.</hi>, and not one interfered with this doctrine. <hi rend='italic'>Luther</hi>, +even in <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus'</hi> time, hurled his anathema against the <q>Frauenberg +Fool,</q> and six years after the publication of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus'</hi> chief +work, <hi rend='italic'>Melanchthon</hi> declared it a sin and a scandal to publish such +nonsensical opinions, contrary to the divine testimony of the Scriptures. +In fear of his religious community the Protestant publisher +<hi rend='italic'>Osiander</hi> smuggled in the spurious preface already mentioned, <q>On the +hypothesis of this work.</q> The Protestant <hi rend='italic'>Rheticus</hi>, a friend and pupil +of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, got into disfavour with <hi rend='italic'>Melanchthon</hi> and had to discontinue +his lectures at Wittenberg. The genial <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, finally, was +prosecuted by his own congregation, because of his defence of the +theory. And when on the Catholic side the Index decree of 1616 was +already beginning to be regarded as obsolete, Protestant theology +still held to the old view even up to the nineteenth century: a long list +of names could be adduced in proof. +</p> + +<p> +Certainly no fair-minded person can see wilful hostility against +astronomy in this procedure. Likewise there should not be imputed +dishonourable intentions to Catholics, if in the course of history they +rendered tribute to human limitation. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +But did not the decrees of 1616 and 1633 do <emph>great harm +to research</emph>? Not at all. That this was hardly the case +with <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> himself we have shown above. Soon after we +find in Italy a goodly number of distinguished scientists; +the Church in no way opposed the newly awakened life, nor +even held aloof from it. <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> himself was honoured in ecclesiastical +circles. Soon after <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> conviction the Jesuit <hi rend='italic'>Grimaldi</hi> +named a mountain on the moon after him. +</p> + +<p> +Nor was there any considerable harm done to the development +of the Copernican theory. Although after <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> the occasions +were not lacking, still no further advocate of his theory was ever +up for trial. Nor was any other book on the subject prohibited. +Freedom was quietly granted more and more. In the edition +<pb n='196'/><anchor id='Pg196'/> +of the Index of 1758, the general prohibition of 1616 of +Copernican writings was withdrawn; it was an official withdrawal +from the old position. But not until 1822 were the +special prohibitions repealed, although they had long since lost +their binding force. The occasion was given by an accidental +occurrence. The Magister S. Palatii of the time intended to +deny the Imprimatur to a book on the Copernican theory, on +account of the obsolete prohibition. An appeal was made, which +brought about the formal repeal of the prohibition. Of course +there had been no hurry to revoke a decision once given. But +according to the astronomer <hi rend='italic'>Lalande's</hi> report of his interview +with the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation of the Index, in +1765, the removal from the Index of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo's</hi> Dialogue had been +postponed only on account of extraneous difficulties. <hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz</hi>, +while in Rome, worked for a repeal of the decree. According to +Eméry, there are extant statements of <hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz</hi> vouching for the +fact that he very nearly succeeded (<hi rend='italic'>Eméry</hi>, Pensées de Leibnitz, +1, 275). The name of <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, too, was omitted in the next +edition of the Index, which appeared in 1835. +</p> + +<p> +But even while the prohibition was still in force, the works +of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> were read everywhere. As early as +1619 <hi rend='italic'>John Remus</hi> wrote from Vienna to <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> that the Copernican +writings may be read by scientific men who had received +special permission, and that this was done in all Italy and in +Rome itself. Besides, it was allowed at any time to make use of +the doctrine as an hypothesis. Thus it advanced continually +nearer and nearer to the position of an established truth. +</p> + +<p> +Soon after the publication of the decree, according to the +report of <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, it was the general conviction in ecclesiastical +and civil circles of Austria <q>that the censure was no obstacle +to the freedom of science in the investigation of God's +work.</q> In 1685 we are assured by the Jesuit <hi rend='italic'>Kochansky</hi>, that +any Catholic was free to <q>look for an irrefutable, mathematical, +and physical demonstration of the movement of the earth.</q> It +was also known that the condemnation of the theory had been +aided by the supposition that there were no valid arguments +in support of the new theory. Hence the Congregation's decree +had in the eighteenth century for the most part lost its force. +<pb n='197'/><anchor id='Pg197'/> +The Jesuit <hi rend='italic'>Boscovich</hi>, a celebrated physicist and astronomer, +wrote in 1755: <q>In consequence of the extraordinary arguments +offered by the consideration of <hi rend='italic'>Kepler's</hi> laws, astronomers +no longer look upon his theory as a mere hypothesis, but as an +established truth</q> (Grisar, 347, 350). +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +Thus in the light of history the condemnation of the +Copernican theory appears quite differently from the picture +presented by the superficial accusation that Rome up to +the nineteenth century condemned this theory. There is no +trace of callousness and oppression, but only submission to +legitimate authority, in so far and as long as one deemed himself +obliged. It was a science enlightened by Christianity, +which, in questions not yet clearly decided, laid down upon +the altar of the Giver of all wisdom the tribute of humble +submission, for the sake of higher interests. +</p> + +<p> +We shall have to class with <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> the uncertainty of +human judgments and tribunals among the <q>troubles of human +life,</q> and say with him: <q>It is also a misery that the judge +is subject to the necessity of not knowing many things, but to +the wise man it is not a fault</q> (De Civ. Dei, IX, 6). May we +therefore infer that the teaching authority is an evil? Were that +true, we should have to abolish the authority of the state and of +parents, because they also make mistakes. We should have to +conclude that there had better be no authority at all on earth. +Where men live and rule, mistakes will certainly be made. +The physician makes mistakes in his important office, yet +patients return to him with confidence. Every pedagogue, +every professor, has made mistakes, yet they still command respect. +The state government is subject to mistakes, yet none +but the anarchist will say that it must therefore be abolished. +<q>That the judge is subject to the necessity of not knowing +many things, is a misery, but to the wise man not a fault.</q> +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='198'/><anchor id='Pg198'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter V. The Witnesses of the Incompatibility +Of Science And Faith.</head> + +<div> +<head>The Objection.</head> + +<p> +We shall not go wrong in presuming that the reader, who +has patiently followed our deductions, has had for some +time in his mind the question: How about the representatives +of scientific research themselves? Do not a large majority of +them, perhaps virtually all, stand alien and repellant to Christian +faith and its fundamental truths? We do not refer to our +modern philosophers, for of them it might be said that their +researches yield questionable speculations of individualistic +stamp, rather than exact results. But there are the representatives +of the more exact sciences, especially of the most exact of all, +natural science. They may be considered the legitimate representatives +of modern science, since their results are the most accurate, +their methods the most strictly scientific; and are they +not, every one of them, opposed to Christian faith, especially to its +fundamental dogma? Is not <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> right when he states in the +final summary of his <q>Welträtsel,</q> in which he so strongly insists +on the incompatibility of religion and natural science: <q>I +am supported by the accord of nearly all modern naturalists who +have the courage to express their convictions</q>? Is it not true +that <hi rend='italic'>A. von Humboldt</hi> is considered the prince of German naturalists? +and yet in his voluminous <q><hi rend='italic'>Kosmos</hi></q> he not once mentions +the name of God? Have not, with few exceptions, German +naturalists, under <hi rend='italic'>Humboldt's</hi> influence, turned against Christianity? +(<hi rend='italic'>W. Menzel</hi>, Die letzten hundertzwanzig Jahre der +Weltgeschichte, VI, 1860, p. 70; cfr. <hi rend='italic'>Pohle</hi>, P. Angelo Secchi, +1904, p. 6). Here indeed the antagonism between true scientific +spirit and the faith seems to take shape in tangible reality, and +to invalidate every argument to the contrary. +</p> + +<pb n='199'/><anchor id='Pg199'/> + +<p> +Thus runs the speech that is ever recurring in the literature +of the day, in newspapers and magazines no less than in books. +And this speech makes an impression on its hearers. Indeed, why +should it not? After describing how these heroes of science in +recent times marched on triumphantly from victory to victory, +how they renewed the face of the earth, and became the pioneers +of human progress, how can they fail to make a deep impression +if in the same breath they state that these discoverers of truth +have, almost to a man, broken with the ancient teachings of the +Christian religion? +</p> + +<p> +Without doubt the suggestive effect of such speculation must +be very considerable with those who lack sufficient historical +knowledge. The case is different with those better acquainted +with the history of the natural sciences. They know that it is +not true to state that the leading natural scientists, for the most +part, or even unanimously, have rejected and denied Christian +religion, that it is a <emph>lie</emph> and a falsification of history. +</p> + +<p> +Let us illustrate it briefly. We do not, of course, mean to say, +that <emph>if</emph> it were true that all the leading naturalists were infidels, +the inference would necessarily follow that Christianity is untenable, +and incompatible with science. Not at all. First of all, +natural scientists who oppose Christianity could hardly ever come +forward in the capacity of experts in this matter. For by venturing +the assertion that world-matter and world-force are eternal +and uncreated, that they develop by force of natural +causality, by unending evolution, and not by the power and +direction of an intelligent cause, they leave their own province +and trespass on the domain of philosophy. These and similar +questions are not solved by natural science research, by experiment, +observation, or calculation, but are the subjects of philosophical +speculation. Atheism, materialism, the denial of the +soul's immortality or of eternal destination, all these are philosophical +matters, and a natural science theory of the world +is a misconception about as absurd as a Swiss England or a +Bavarian Spain. +</p> + +<p> +As it is impossible to review here all scientists of the past +centuries, to probe their bent of mind, we shall restrict ourselves +in the following to scientists of the first rank, for to +<pb n='200'/><anchor id='Pg200'/> +them the assertion above mentioned must chiefly refer. First of +all, they were possessed of that spirit of scientific research claimed +to be incompatible with the faith; and they, more than others, +should have been conscious of this contradiction. It is plain +that if they did not know anything of the claimed antagonism +between the theories of evolution and of creation, between +physical facts and spirituality of soul, between natural law and +miracles; if it be shown that many of them were actually orthodox +Christians, believing in the supernatural and yet enthusiastic +friends of science, fathoming the laws of nature and yet +unshaken in their faith, then the fact that inferior minds talk +of a contradiction unknown to these great ones can no longer +make much of an impression. +</p> + +<p> +Therefore let us look over the long list of great scholars +of the last centuries, those great men to whom we owe knowledge +and discoveries that are our joy to this very day. Among them +we shall find many who, in their life and thought, have plainly +confessed themselves faithful Christians; we shall find that +others were at least the opponents of atheism and materialism, +that they clung to the fundamental truths of the Christian faith, +and that is a matter of moment when the antagonism between +natural science and faith is under discussion. +</p> + +<p> +We shall not go back to the ancient representatives of natural +science, men like <hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Archimedes</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Albert the +Great</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Roger Bacon</hi>, and others of past ages, partly because +there is no doubt about the religious views of those men, partly +because research at their time was imperfect. We begin at the +rise of modern natural science. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Old Masters.</head> + +<p> +At the threshold of modern natural science there stands the +man who solved the riddle that had puzzled centuries before +him, the father of modern astronomy, <hi rend='italic'>Nikolaus Copernicus</hi>. +He had studied at the universities of Cracow, Bologna, Ferrara, +and Padua, and while he was one of the foremost historians +of his time, it was astronomy that had engaged his enthusiastic +devotion from his youth. He was a Catholic priest, a Canon +<pb n='201'/><anchor id='Pg201'/> +of Frauenberg. <q>If recent representatives of the Roman +Church,</q> so writes the Protestant theologian, <hi rend='italic'>O. Zoeckler</hi>, +<q>praise this Frauenberg Canon as a faithful son of their Church, +this fact must be granted by Protestants, despite the frankness +with which he opposed the Aristotelian and Ptolemaic theories +taught by the scholastics, and despite his friendship with the +Protestant <hi rend='italic'>Rheticus</hi></q> (Gottes Zeugen im Reiche der Natur, +1906, p. 82). <hi rend='italic'>George Joachim</hi>, a native of Feldkirch, surnamed +<hi rend='italic'>Rheticus</hi>, and a Protestant professor at Wittenberg, came to +<hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> at Frauenberg, and was cordially received. His +praise for <q>his teacher</q> is unreserved. He speaks in the same +admiring terms of <hi rend='italic'>Tiedemann Giese</hi>, in those days Bishop of +Kulm. +</p> + +<p> +For nearly forty years <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> sat in the modest observatory +which he had erected at Frauenberg, studying and +collecting the material for his book. Even after all this time +this deliberate scholar, despite the urging of his friends, especially +Bishop <hi rend='italic'>Tiedemann Giese</hi> and Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Schoenberg</hi>, Archbishop +of Capua, hesitated for ten years longer before publishing +his discoveries. The work was entitled <hi rend='italic'>De revolutionibus +orbium caelestium, libri VI</hi>, and was dedicated to Pope <hi rend='italic'>Paul +III.</hi> The author himself could enjoy his achievement but very +little. The first copy sent by the printer reached <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> +on his deathbed, and a few hours later he breathed his last, +on May 24, 1543. +</p> + +<p> +In the introduction to his work this devout Christian scientist +wrote: <q>Who would not be urged by the intimate intercourse +with the work of His hands to the contemplation of the +Most High, and to the admiration for the Omnipotent Architect +of the universe, in whom is the highest happiness, and in whom +is the perfection of all that is good?</q> +</p> + +<p> +Without <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> there could have been no <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, without +<hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> no <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>. These three men, in the words of a recent +astronomer, belong inseparably together, they support and supplement +one another. It might be fittingly asked, after which +of these three the celestial system should be named; and were +it possible to ask these three men for their opinion in this +matter, they would probably all give the answer that has been +<pb n='202'/><anchor id='Pg202'/> +ascribed to one or the other of them: Not my system, but +God's Order. Like <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, so <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> were +profoundly religious men. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Johann Kepler</hi>, born of Protestant parents in Württemberg +in 1571, was raised a Lutheran. In 1594 he was appointed +professor of mathematics at a school in Graz, and after that +he dwelt for the most time in Austria, which country became +his second home. From Graz he was called to Prague to be +mathematician at the imperial court, and from there to Linz +to be professor at the college there. His last years were passed +at Sagan and Ratisbon, where he died in 1630. Even after +having left Austria he gratefully remembered the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>clementia +austriaca</foreign> and the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>favor archiducalis</foreign>. <hi rend='italic'>Kepler's</hi> astronomical +achievements are known to everybody, especially his laws of +the planets. With an untiring spirit of research he combined +beautiful traits of character, cheerfulness, kindness, and modesty, +but chiefly a profoundly religious mind. However, he was in +difficult circumstances as far as his religious life was concerned. +Quite early he came in conflict with the religious authorities of +his confession, particularly for the reason that they considered +<hi rend='italic'>Kepler's</hi> Copernican views as against the Bible, a fact which the +learned astronomer could not see. There were also other differences. +The conflict became more and more aggravated. It +cannot be denied that the Lutheran Church-authorities proceeded +against <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> with a lack of consideration never shown +by Rome against men like <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>. <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> was expelled from the +Lutheran Church, and despite his efforts to be reinstated the +ban was never lifted. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Like <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, so was his predecessor at the Catholic court of Prague, +the Danish astronomer <hi rend='italic'>Tycho Brahe</hi> (died 1601), a devout Protestant, +but the trials of <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> were spared him. His erroneous idea that +the Copernican system conflicted with Holy Writ kept him from subscribing +to it: it led him to devise a system midway between <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> +and <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi>. His religious sentiment is evidenced by a passage +from a letter of his, written at his father's death, <q>Although there +are many consolations for me, of a religious nature based on Holy +Writ, and of a philosophical kind drawn from the contemplation of the +fate of all men and of the inconstancy of everything under the moon, +it is a special comfort for me that my father departed so sweetly and +piously from this valley of misery to the heavenly eternal home, where, +according to <hi rend='italic'>St. Paul</hi>, we shall find a lasting abode.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='203'/><anchor id='Pg203'/> + +<p> +But let us return to <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>. There is evidence that at various +times in his life he wavered between his Lutheran confession +and the Catholic faith, but that is as far as he went. He was +of the opinion that the fundamental truths of both were in +accord, and he would not presume to judge of the differences; +he had taken a view-point of his own, from which he could not +be made to recede. On the other hand, he was shocked when +his fellow-Lutherans in Styria were on two occasions severely +dealt with, although he personally had been treated with especial +consideration. Otherwise his opinions on Catholic matters and +the <q>wisdom</q> of the Catholic Church were eminently fair; he +censured his co-religionists for their invidious attacks on Rome, +and for their hesitancy in adopting the Gregorian reform of +the calendar. He had friendly relation with many a Catholic +scientist, was in correspondence with many Jesuits, was even +frequently their guest, receiving stimulus, commendation, and +scientific communications from them. +</p> + +<p> +To <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi> the study of astronomy became largely a prayer; +the finest of his scientific works he was wont to conclude with +the doxology of the Psalmist, <q>Great is our Lord, and great is +His power, and of His wisdom there is no number: praise Him +ye Heavens; praise ye Him, O Sun, and Moon, ye Stars and +light, and praise Him in your language. Thou, too, praise Him, +O soul of mine, thy Lord, thy Creator, as long as it is granted +to thee</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Harmonices Mundi</hi>, v. 9). His name and work is +commemorated in the Keplerbund in Germany, which aims at +the promotion of scientific knowledge in the sense of <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, +in opposition to the misuse of natural science for purposes of +materialism and atheism. +</p> + +<p> +The work, begun so happily by <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, was +completed by the great Englishman, <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> (died 1727). It +was he who in his immortal work, <hi rend='italic'>Philosophiae naturalis principia +mathematica</hi>, laid bare the law of the universe, which +compels the heavenly bodies to revolve about one another. +Therewith the laws of <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, and consequently the Copernican +hypothesis, became established. When, in 1727, this scientist, at +the age of eighty-five, died, his mortal remains were entombed in +Westminster Abbey, the Pantheon of the British nation. Lofty +<pb n='204'/><anchor id='Pg204'/> +science and the reverent worship of his Creator were combined +in the noble mind of this great Briton. In an appendix to his +master-work, referred to above, he cited his proofs for the existence +of God, and stated that <q>the entire order, as to space +and time of all things existing, must have necessarily proceeded +from the conception and will of an existing Being,</q> +that <q>the admirable arrangement of sun, planets, and comets +could only emanate from the decree and the design of an All-wise +and Omnipotent Being,</q> that <q>we admire Him for His +perfections, we adore and worship Him as the ruler of the +world, we, the servants of the great Sovereign of the Universe.</q> +According to <hi rend='italic'>Voltaire</hi>, it was stated by <hi rend='italic'>Newton's</hi> disciple, <hi rend='italic'>Clarke</hi>, +that his master invariably pronounced the name of God with +reverent attitude and expression. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Inseparably connected with the history of the Copernican system +there is the name, which recalls harsh accusations and painful memories, +the name of <hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>. That he had nothing in common with the +aims of those who have broken with faith and Christianity, nor with +that hostility against his Church for which his name is so often misused, +has been made evident by what we have said on another page +(see page 189). Not only during his early life was his religious +turn of mind evidenced, but also later on and up to the end of his life +he continued to observe faithfully the duties of his religion. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +One of the greatest physicists of recent times was <hi rend='italic'>Christian +Huygens</hi>, who died in 1695 at his native city, The Hague. To +him we owe the epoch-making discovery of the undulation of +light, while <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> had held light to be a matter of emission. +But while <hi rend='italic'>Huygens</hi> advanced over <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> in this respect, he +paid tribute to human limitation by remaining prejudiced +against <hi rend='italic'>Newton's</hi> theory of gravitation, which he rejected. +<hi rend='italic'>Huygens</hi> was a believing Christian. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In his philosophic dissertation <q>Kosmotheoros,</q> a posthumous work, +he says in regard to the possibility of the celestial bodies being inhabited: +<q>How could the investigator look up to God, the Creator of +all these great worlds, otherwise but in the spirit of deepest reverence? +Here it will be possible for us to find manifold proofs to demonstrate +His providence and wonderful wisdom; likewise will our contemplation +contend against those who are spreading false opinions, such as attributing +the origin of the earth to the accidental union of atoms, or of +the earth being without a beginning and without a creator.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='205'/><anchor id='Pg205'/> + +<p> +Religious fervour is still more pronounced in <hi rend='italic'>Huygens'</hi> contemporary, +<hi rend='italic'>Robert Boyle</hi> (died 1692), a son of Ireland. While +he had made considerable achievements in physics, his chief +fame lies in chemistry: he inaugurated the period in which +chemistry became gradually an independent science. Although +working in a different field of research, he is similar to <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> +in many respects: like <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Huygens</hi>, his love of scientific +studies induced him to remain unmarried, like <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> he +found his last resting place in Westminster Abbey, but chiefly +he is like <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi> because of his pious, religious mind. He was +much occupied with theological studies, and in them the demonstration +from nature of the existence of God, and the author's +reverence for the Scriptures are most conspicuous: <q>In relation +to the Bible,</q> he writes, <q>all the books of men, even the most +learned, are like the planets that receive their light and brightness +from the sun.</q> On his deathbed he made a foundation +for apologetic lectures: the Boyle-lectures are held to this very +day. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +We shall have to pass by others. We might point to the English +philosopher and statesman, <hi rend='italic'>Francis Bacon</hi> of Verulam (died 1626), +who won his place in the history of natural science by his urging of +the empiric method; we might point to <hi rend='italic'>W. Harvey</hi> (died 1658), the +discoverer of the blood-circulation, a man of earnest and simple piety; +we might mention the pious <hi rend='italic'>Albrecht von Haller</hi> (died 1777), <hi rend='italic'>J. Bernouilli</hi> +(died 1728) the co-inventor of integral calculus, the man of +whom his great disciple <hi rend='italic'>Euler</hi> relates that this <hi rend='italic'>Bernouilli</hi>, co-inventor +of the most difficult of all calculations, this great mathematician, expressed +regret in his old age that he had devoted so many years to +science, and only few hours to religion, and that on his deathbed he +admonished those around him to adhere to the Word of God because +that alone is the word of life. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We shall name but one more, a son of northern Sweden, the +famous botanist, <hi rend='italic'>Karl Linné</hi> (died 1778). He, too, found God +in the living nature which he studied so diligently. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In commenting on his <hi rend='italic'>Systema naturae</hi> he writes: <q>Man, know +thyself; in theological aspect, that thou art created with an immortal +soul, after the image of God; in moral aspect, that thou alone art +blessed with a rational soul for the praise of thy sublime Creator. I +ask, why did God put man equipped thus in sense and spirit on this +earth, where he perceives this wonderfully ordered nature? For what, +but to praise and admire the invisible Master-builder for His magnificent +work.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='206'/><anchor id='Pg206'/> + +<p> +These are the great masters and reformers of recent natural +science, the men who opened up the paths which natural science +of the present day is still pursuing; most of these savants +were of a Christian mind, many of them even pious. There +were but few indifferent or irreligious, such as <hi rend='italic'>E. Halley</hi> (died +1742), who computed the cycle of the comet since named after +him, and <hi rend='italic'>G. de Buffon</hi> (died 1788): but they are a small +minority. The period of highest achievement in modern natural +science bears the stamp of religion; indeed, to a great extent it +bears the halo of devotion and fervour. An incompatibility of +research and faith, a solidarity of science and anti-Christian +tendency, was never known to the mind of these great masters. +</p> + +<p> +<q>Any one who has grasped even the elements of natural +science, the unity of natural forces and their rigid conformity +to laws, becomes a monist if he has the faculty for clear reasoning, +and as to the others, there is no help for them anyway</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>L. Plate</hi>, Ultramontane Weltanschauung und moderne Lebenskunde, +1907, 11). This sort of argument is shouted at us in +manifold variations. How does that statement look in the light +of history? Men like <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Linné</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Boyle</hi>, +thus knew nothing of the elements of natural science, nothing of +the conformity to laws of natural forces: because they were +neither monists nor atheists, but worshippers of the Creator +of heaven and earth! A more painful contrast cannot be imagined +than to see these great masters and pioneers rated as lesser +minds, ignorant of real natural science, by those who trail far +behind them and who are seeking their footsteps. The religious +conviction of the natural scientists of a past age is sufficient +proof that, not the research in natural science, but other causes +lead minds to infidelity. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Modern Times.</head> + +<p> +We turn to the nineteenth century. Does the picture perhaps +change essentially in the century that has shown its children so +much progress, that has disclosed so many secrets of nature, +but has also taught irreligion to thousands of men? Does it +become true now that natural science and Christian fundamental +<pb n='207'/><anchor id='Pg207'/> +truths are opposed to each other in hostile attitude? Claims to +this effect are not lacking. In fact, the number of those who +refuse assent to the Christian religion is increasing. But even +at this time we do not find such to be the majority of eminent +scientists, and our inquiry is about eminent scientists, those who +make the science of a period, not those who can hardly expect +to have their names known by posterity. A considerable number, +indeed the majority, of the master minds of natural science, +even in the nineteenth century, reject materialism and atheism, +and not infrequently they are pious Christians; another proof +that just upon the deeper and more serious minds religion exercises +a stronger power of attraction. +</p> + +<p> +Let us commence with the astronomers. +</p> + +<p> +<q>The sciences and their true representatives,</q> so states the +renowned <hi rend='italic'>Mädler</hi> of Dorpat, <q>do not deserve the reproaches and +imputations heaped upon them from a certain side, that they +would estrange man from God, even turn him into an atheist +... we hope to show of astronomy especially that just the contrary +is taking place</q> (Reden und Abhandlungen über Gegenstände +der Himmelskunde, 1870, 326). +</p> + +<p> +The greatest astronomer of the nineteenth century, and one +of the greatest discoverers of all ages, was undoubtedly <hi rend='italic'>William +Herschel</hi> (died 1822). His son <hi rend='italic'>John Herschel</hi> (died 1871) +became his <q>worthy successor, almost his peer, who won a fame +nearly equal to that of the inherited name</q> (<hi rend='italic'>R. Wolf</hi>, +Geschichte der Astronomie, 1877, 505). While not hostile to +religion, the father had been so engrossed in his restless research, +that religion received little attention, but religious +thought and sentiment played a prominent part in the son. +Time and again he opposed with zeal the materialistic-atheistic +explanation of the universe. <q>Nothing is more unfounded than +the objection made by some well-meaning but undiscerning persons, +that the study of natural science induces a doubt of religion +and of the immortality of the soul. Be assured that its +logical effect upon any well-ordered mind must be just the +opposite</q> (Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural +Philosophy, 1830, 7). +</p> + +<p> +It was <hi rend='italic'>Leverrier</hi> (died 1877), Director of the Paris Observatory, +<pb n='208'/><anchor id='Pg208'/> +who by calculations ascertained the existence and exact +position of the remotest planet Neptune even before it was +discovered. When eventually <hi rend='italic'>Galle</hi> of Berlin really found the +planet in the position indicated, <hi rend='italic'>Leverrier's</hi> name became +famous. But greater still were the achievements of this indefatigable +investigator in respect to the known planets. When +he presented to the French Academy the final part of his great +work, the calculations of Jupiter and Saturnus, he said: <q>During +our long labours, which it took us thirty-five years to complete, +we needed the support obtained by the contemplation of +one of the grandest works of creation, and by the thought +that it strengthened in us the imperishable truths of a spiritualistic +(<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, non-materialistic) philosophy.</q> He was an orthodox +Catholic, known as a Clerical. A newspaper complained of him +that <q>Under the empire he was a clerical Senator, concerned +with the interests of the altar no less than with those of the +throne</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kneller</hi>, Das Christenthum und die Vertreter der +neueren Naturwissenschaft, 1904, 96. In the following pages +we have made frequent use of the material gathered in this +sterling work. See also <hi rend='italic'>James J. Walsh</hi>, Makers of Modern +Medicine (1907); and the same author's Catholic Churchmen +in Science, I (1909), II (1910)). +</p> + +<p> +One year after the death of <hi rend='italic'>Leverrier</hi> another scientist of +the first rank died. It was <hi rend='italic'>A. Secchi</hi> (died 1878). Member of +nearly all the scientific academies of the world, he was not only +a faithful Christian, but also a priest: for forty-five years, and +until his death, he wore the garb of the Society of Jesus. As an +astronomer he has been named, not without good cause, the father +of astrophysics: he ascertained the chemical composition of +about 4,000 stars and classified them into what is known as +<hi rend='italic'>Secchi's</hi> four types of stars. As a physicist he wrote an important +work on The Unity of Natural Forces. He was also an +eminent meteorologist. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +At the second International Exposition at Paris his meteorograph +was quite a feature. The <hi rend='italic'>Kölnische Zeitung</hi> wrote, on March 2, 1878: +<q>Visitors of the Italian Exhibition, at the second World's Fair in +Paris, could see the marvellous instrument which does the work of +ten observers and surpasses them in accuracy. At the same time they +<pb n='209'/><anchor id='Pg209'/> +could obtain all needed information about details and scope of the +meteorograph from the exhibitor himself; for <hi rend='italic'>Secchi</hi> was there daily, +devoting several hours to answering questions in any of the civilized +languages of Europe. It is peculiarly interesting to observe the silent +movement of the hands working day and night like registrars of the +natural forces, and recording for every quarter of an hour with the +utmost accuracy all changes in temperature, in humidity, every variance +of the wind, any movement of the mercury in the barometer. +Even the force of the wind and the time of rain is registered by this +wonderful instrument.</q> The inventor, out of 40,000 art exhibitors, +was awarded the great golden medal. He also received the insignia +of an officer of the French Legion of Honor, while the Emperor of +Brazil appointed him an officer of the <q>Golden Rose.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The French scientist <hi rend='italic'>Moigno</hi> writes of <hi rend='italic'>Secchi</hi>: <q><hi rend='italic'>Secchi</hi> was very +pious, and as a worker he knew no limits. He was ever ready to +evolve new scientific plans, to enter into new and long campaigns of +observation. The mere list of his 800 works reveals him as one of the +most intrepid workers of our century. And let this be considered: +every one of these writings, no matter how brief, was the result of +subtle and difficult researches and observations. And after devoting +the day to arduous writing, he passed the night searching the skies</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Pohle</hi>, P. Angelo Secchi, 1904, 191). +</p> + +<p> +In the nineteenth century, too, astronomy has not failed in its +mission of leading to God. A long list could be named of believing +astronomers of great achievements. For instance, the Roman astronomer +<hi rend='italic'>Respighi</hi> (died 1889), a resolute Catholic. And <hi rend='italic'>Lamont</hi>, Director +of the Observatory of Munich, whose Catholic orthodoxy was generally +known. <hi rend='italic'>Heis</hi> (died 1877) likewise was a zealous Catholic: when he +had finished his map of the sky, after 27 years of hard work, he sent +one of the first copies to <hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi> The astronomers <hi rend='italic'>Bessel</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Olbers</hi> +speak in their letters of God, of the hereafter and Providence, in a way +that has nothing in common with materialism. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Secchi</hi> was not the only priest and monk among the astronomers of +the nineteenth century. The very first day of the century was made +notable by the astronomical achievement of a monk. <hi rend='italic'>Joseph Piazzi</hi>, +a member of the Theatine order (died 1826), discovered on that day +the first asteroid, Ceres. The great mathematician <hi rend='italic'>Gauss</hi> named his +first born son Joseph, in <hi rend='italic'>Piazzi's</hi> honor. +</p> + +<p> +It is, indeed, a remarkable fact, testifying strongly against the +incompatibility of natural science and faith, that just the Catholic +clergy, the prominent representatives of religion and faith, have contributed +a large contingent to the number of natural scientists. +<hi rend='italic'>Poggendorf's</hi> Biographical Dictionary of the Exact Sciences contains, +down to 1863, according to preface and recapitulation, the names and +biographical sketches of 8,847 natural scientists. Of these, 862 are +Catholic priests, amounting to 9.8 per cent. To appreciate these 10 +per cent it must be taken into account that most of them were not +connected with natural science by their position, but only through +their personal interest, and most of them were engaged in other +duties. +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='210'/><anchor id='Pg210'/> + +<p> +Mathematics, although not natural science proper, is inseparably +connected with it. For this reason we may extend our +consideration to mathematicians. We only point to the three +greatest, <hi rend='italic'>Euler</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Gauss</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Cauchy</hi>, and all three were religious +men. <hi rend='italic'>Euler</hi> (died 1783 at Petersburg) has no peer in the recent +history of science in prolific activity: ten times he was awarded +the prize by the Paris Academy of Sciences. <hi rend='italic'>Cantor</hi> says of +him: <q>Like most great mathematicians, <hi rend='italic'>Euler</hi> was profoundly +religious, though without bigotry. He personally conducted +every evening the private devotions at his home, and one of the +few polemical books he wrote was a defence of revelation against +the objections of free-thinkers.</q> Its publication at Berlin in +1747, in close proximity of the court of <hi rend='italic'>Frederick the Great</hi>, presupposed +a certain moral courage. In this book he refers to +the difficulties found in all sciences, even in geometry, adding: +<q>By what right then can the free-thinkers demand of us to +reject at once Holy Writ in its entirety, because of some difficulties +which frequently are not even so important as those +complained of in geometry?</q> <hi rend='italic'>Gauss</hi> (died 1855) is perhaps +the greatest mathematician of all times. It sounds incredible, +yet it is well attested, that as a child of three years, when in +the workshop of his father, a plain mechanic, he was able to +correct the father if he made a mistake in figuring out the +wages paid to his journeymen. His biographer, <hi rend='italic'>Waltershausen</hi>, +says of him: <q>The conviction of a personal existence after +death, the firm belief in an ultimate Ruler of things, in an +eternal, just, all-wise and all-powerful God, formed the foundation +of his religious life, which, with his unsurpassed scientific +researches, resolved itself into a perfect harmony.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Cauchy</hi> +(died 1857) was a man of most extraordinary genius, whose +creative genius knew how to discover new paths everywhere, and +almost at every weekly meeting of the Paris Academy <hi rend='italic'>Cauchy</hi> +had something new to offer. In addition he was a dutiful Catholic, +and a member of St. Vincent's Society. When, shortly before +the February revolution, an onslaught upon the Jesuit +schools was made, he defended them in two pamphlets. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +One of them contains the following confession of faith: <q>I am a +Christian, that is, I believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, with <hi rend='italic'>Tycho +<pb n='211'/><anchor id='Pg211'/> +Brahe</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Descartes</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Fermat</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Pascal</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Grimaldi</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Euler</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Guldin</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Boscovich</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Gerdil</hi>; with all great astronomers, +all great physicists, all great mathematicians of past centuries. I +am also a Catholic, with the majority of them, and if asked for my +reasons, I would enumerate them readily. By them it would be made +clear that my conviction is not the result of inherited prejudices, but +of profound inquiry. I am a sincere Catholic, as <hi rend='italic'>Corneille</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Racine</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>La Bruyère</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bossuet</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bourdaloue</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Fénelon</hi> were, and such as were and +still are a large portion of the most eminent men of our times, among +them those who have achieved most in the exact sciences, in philosophy +and literature, and who have most prominently adorned our Academy</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Valson</hi>, Vie de Cauchy, I, 173). When near death, and told that +the priest would bring the Holy Sacrament, he ordered the finest +flowers of his garden used in the reception of the Lord. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We now come to the physicists. To begin with the most +prominent representatives of the science of optics, which was +developed especially during the first half of the century, there +are to be named chiefly <hi rend='italic'>Fresnel</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Frauenhofer</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Fizeau</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Foucault</hi>. +<hi rend='italic'>A. Fresnel</hi> (died 1827), the originator of the modern theory of +light, clung to his conviction of the spirituality and immortality +of the soul. <hi rend='italic'>Frauenhofer</hi> (died 1826) showed himself to be a +man of refinement and of kindness, which only occasionally was +disturbed by natural irritability: he was much devoted to his +religion, so that even his guests while at his house had to observe +the abstinence prescribed by the Church; this was quite +significant, considering the indifference of his times in this +respect. <hi rend='italic'>Fizeau</hi> (died 1896), too, was a staunch Catholic, who +fearlessly testified to his belief, even before the Paris Academy. +Though his work was of the first rank, France's chief marks of +honour passed him by, and little notice was even given to his +death. A significant fact. <q>These circumstances,</q> so writes +<hi rend='italic'>Kneller</hi>, <q>induced us to inquire for particulars; and through +the services of friends we obtained information in Paris from +most reliable source that <hi rend='italic'>Fizeau</hi> was a faithful Christian, who +fulfilled his religious duties. For this very reason his name had +been stricken, at the Centenary of the Academy, from the list of +candidates for the cross of the legion of honor, notwithstanding +the fact that, on the strength of his scientific achievement, he +should long have been Commander and even Grand Officer of this +order.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Cornu</hi> was the only one to protest against this slight. +<hi rend='italic'>Foucault</hi> (died 1868) had, in the time of his restless scientific +<pb n='212'/><anchor id='Pg212'/> +work, taken an unsympathetic attitude towards the Catholic +religion. In his last illness he returned, step by step, to his +Creator and Redeemer, in whom he found his comfort, and he +breathed his last in peace with God and the Church. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Foucault's</hi> great countryman, <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi> (died 1836), the celebrated +investigator in the fields of electricity, was also estranged +from the Christian religion, but, after passing through torturing +doubts, he regained undisturbed possession of his Catholic +faith, and was a pious Christian at the time of his brilliant +discoveries. He had frequent intercourse with <hi rend='italic'>A. F. Ozanam</hi>, +and the discussion almost without exception turned to God. +Then <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi> would cover his forehead with his hands, exclaiming: +<q>How great God is! Ozanam! how great God is, and our +knowledge is as nothing.</q> <q>This venerable head,</q> <hi rend='italic'>Ozanam</hi> +relates of his friend, <q>covered with honours and full of knowledge, +bowed down before the mysteries of the faith; he knelt at +the same altars where before him <hi rend='italic'>Descartes</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Pascal</hi> worshipped +humbly, beside the poor widow and the small child, who +perhaps were less humble than he</q> (<hi rend='italic'>A. F. Ozanam</hi>, Oeuvres +Complètes, X, 37, and VIII, 89). As he was dying, and <hi rend='italic'>M. +Deschamps</hi>, director of the college of Marseille, began to read +aloud some passages from the <q>Imitation of Christ,</q> the dying +man remarked that he knew the book by heart. +</p> + +<p> +Another great discoverer in the domain of electricity, who +had preceded <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi>, was <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> (died 1827). Like his great +fellow countryman, <hi rend='italic'>Galvani</hi> (died 1798), who did not disdain to +be a member of the third order of St. Francis, <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> was a +staunch Catholic; every day he recited the rosary. +</p> + +<p> +At Como, his home, he was daily seen to go to holy Mass +and, on holidays, to the Sacraments. Those who passed his +house on Saturdays saw a small lamp burning before the picture +of the Blessed Virgin Mary over his door. If the servant forgot +to light the lamp, <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> did it himself. On Feast days, when +visiting the parish church, the great electrician could be seen +among the children, explaining the catechism to them. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +A friend of <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi>, the Canon <hi rend='italic'>Giacomo Ciceri</hi>, once was endeavoring +to convert a dying man, who, however, refused to hear him, on the +ground that whereas religion might be good for the common people, +<pb n='213'/><anchor id='Pg213'/> +scientists did not need it, and he reckoned himself among them. <hi rend='italic'>Ciceri</hi> +thereupon reminded him of <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi>. This made an impression upon the +dying man, who declared that if <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> be seriously religious, and not +only as a matter of convention, he would consent to receive the +Sacraments. The Canon then requested <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> to write a few lines. +<hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> replied as follows: <q rend='pre'>I do not understand how anybody can doubt +my sincerity and constancy in the religion which I profess, and which +is that of Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church, wherein I was born and +raised, and which I have professed all my life, inwardly and outwardly.... +Should any misdemeanor on my part have prompted any +one to suspect me of unbelief, then I will declare, for the purpose of +making reparation ... that I always have believed this Holy Catholic +religion to be the only true and infallible one, and that I still think +so, and I thank our dear Lord incessantly for having given me this +belief, in which to live and to die is my resolution, in the firm hope +of gaining the eternal life. It is true, I acknowledge this belief to be a +gift of God, a supernatural belief; yet, I have not neglected human +means to fortify myself in this belief, and to drive away all doubts +that may arise to tempt me. For this reason, I have studied the faith +diligently in its foundations, by reading apologetic and controversial +writings, weighing the reasons for and against; a way, which supplies +the strongest proof, and makes it most credible for the human reason +to such a degree, that any noble mind, not perverted by sins and +passions, cannot help embracing and loving it. I wish this profession, +for which I was asked and which I willingly make, written and signed +by my own hand, to be shown at will to any one, because I am not +ashamed of the Gospel. May my writing bear good fruit.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Alexander Volta.</hi> +</p> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='smallcaps'>Milan</hi>, January 6th, 1815.</l> +<l><q rend='post'>(<hi rend='italic'>C. Grandi</hi>, Alessandro Volta, 1899, 575.)</q></l> +</lg> + +</quote> + +<p> +He who, for the first time, is made aware of the religious confession +of the greatest natural scientists may perhaps be astonished. +Hitherto, he had heard little of the Christian mind of +these men, but a great deal about their alleged indifference for +religion, and about their materialism and atheism. Now, suddenly, +he sees a large number of them to be the enemies of +atheism, many, indeed, to be zealous Christians. +</p> + +<p> +This is due to the biographers: they dwell largely on the +scientific achievement of a man, likewise on his human qualities, +but his religion is often not mentioned at all. When, in 1888, +a monument was erected to <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi> in his native city, Lyons, +not a word in the speeches referred to the fact that he was a +faithful Catholic. Nay, more; on one of the books seen on his +monument is chiselled in bold letters the word <q>Encyclopédie.</q> +<pb n='214'/><anchor id='Pg214'/> +Those unaware of the facts would infer that <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi> had been +one of the Encyclopædists. His actual relation to this infamous +work was that he had read it in his youth, but abhorred it in his +later age. +</p> + +<p> +The English physicist, <hi rend='italic'>Faraday</hi> (died 1867), according to +<hi rend='italic'>Tyndall</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond</hi> the greatest experimentist of +all times, was, like <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi>, of religious mind. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In a letter to a lady he wrote: <q>I belong to a small and despised +Christian sect, known by the name of Sandemanians. Our hope is +based upon the belief which is in Christ.</q> In 1847, he concluded his +lectures at the Royal Institution with the following words: <q>In +teaching us those things, our science should prompt us to think of +Him whose works they are.</q> At a later lecture, he declared: <q>I have +never encountered anything to cause a contradiction between things +within the scope of man, and the higher things, relating to his future +and unconceivable to (unaided) human mind</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jones</hi>, The Life and +Letters of Faraday). +</p> + +</quote> +<p> +Of the same bent of mind was <hi rend='italic'>Faraday's</hi> fellow countryman, +<hi rend='italic'>Maxwell</hi> (died 1879), known to every one who has studied the +development of the theories of electricity. This ingenious theoretician +of electrics, professor of experimental physics at Cambridge, +was deeply religious. Every evening he led in the family +prayer; he regularly attended divine service, and partook of the +monthly communion of his denomination. Those more intimately +acquainted with <hi rend='italic'>Maxwell</hi> agree, that he was one of the +worthiest men they ever met. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Nothing could better illustrate his religious sentiment than the +splendid prayer found among his posthumous papers: <q>Almighty God, +Thou who hast created man after Thy image and hast given him a +living soul, that he should search Thee and rule over Thy creatures, +teach us to study the works by Thy hands that we may subject the +earth for our use, and strengthen our reason for Thy service, and let us +receive Thy holy word thus, that we may believe in Him whom Thou +hast sent us to give us the knowledge of salvation and the forgiving of +our sins, all of which we pray for in the name of the same Jesus Christ, +our Lord</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Campbell-Garnett</hi>, The Life of J. C. Maxwell). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Maxwell's</hi> devout mind is especially significant here, because, +like <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi>, he occupied himself much with philosophical +and theological questions. Every Sunday upon return +<pb n='215'/><anchor id='Pg215'/> +from church he is said to have buried himself in his theological +books. +</p> + +<p> +Many others might be mentioned of English physicists of the +past century, who combined religious belief with great knowledge. +The peculiar trait of the English character to respect and +preserve with piety the inherited institutions of the past, as +against radicalism and the craze for innovation, manifests itself +also in the absence of the immature and frivolous juggling with +the great truths of the Christian past, not infrequently met with +elsewhere. Let us mention but one more of England's great men +who have died in recent years. In December, 1907, the papers +reported the death of <hi rend='italic'>William Thomson</hi>, latterly better known +as <hi rend='italic'>Lord Kelvin</hi>. He lived to the age of 83 years, up to his death +incessantly busy with scientific work. As early as 1855, <hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz</hi> +described him as <q>one of the foremost mathematical +physicists of Europe.<note place='foot'>After visiting <hi rend='italic'>Thomson</hi> at Kreuznach, <hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz</hi> wrote: <q>He surpasses +all great scientists I have personally met, in acumen, clearness +and activity of spirit, so that I felt somewhat dull beside him.</q> +<hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz</hi> himself (died 1894) has never expressed himself about religion. +Absorbed by his scientific work, he seemed to have been +indifferent to religion, but according to his biographer his father was +a decided theist, and his philosophical views were held in great esteem, +and partly subscribed to, by the son. According to <hi rend='italic'>Dennert</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz</hi> +attended church now and then, and even partook of holy communion. +Of decided religious bent of mind was <hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz's</hi> fellow-countryman, +and co-discoverer of the law of energy, <hi rend='italic'>Robert Mayer</hi>. At the Congress +of scientists at Innsbruck, in 1869, <hi rend='italic'>Mayer</hi> ended his address with the +significant words: <q>Let me in conclusion declare from the bottom of +my heart that true philosophy cannot and must not be anything else +but propædeutics of the Christian religion.</q> His letters breathe piety. +For a time he had the intention of joining the Catholic Church.</note></q> The Berlin Academy of Science expressed +high praise and admiration in its address felicitating +<hi rend='italic'>Thomson</hi> on his Golden Jubilee. Undoubtedly, he merited this +admiration also by stoutly defending from the viewpoint of +science the necessity of a Divine Creator. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>We do not know,</q> he wrote, <q>at what moment a creation of matter +or of energy fixed a beginning beyond which no speculation based +on mechanical laws is able to lead us. In exact mechanics, if we were +ever inclined to forget this barrier, we necessarily would be reminded +of it by the consideration that reasoning, resting exclusively upon the +law of mechanics, points to a time when the earth must have been +<pb n='216'/><anchor id='Pg216'/> +uninhabited, and it also teaches us that our own bodies, like those of +all living plants and animals, and fossils, are organized forms of matter +for which science can give no other explanation than the will of a +Creator, a truth, in support of which geological history offers rich +evidence</q> (On Mechanical Antecedent of Motion, Heat and Light, +1884). <q>The only contribution of dynamics to theoretical biology consists +in the absolute negation of an automatic beginning and automatic +continuance of life</q> (Addresses and Speeches). +</p> + +<p> +On May 1, 1902, the Rev. Prof. <hi rend='italic'>G. Henslow</hi>, according to the <hi rend='italic'>London +Times</hi>, spoke at University College, before a big audience with the +President of the University as chairman, on the subject <q>The Rationalism +of To-day, an Examination of Darwinism.</q> On conclusion of the +speech the venerable octogenarian, <hi rend='italic'>Lord Kelvin</hi>, arose and proposed a +resolution of thanks to the speaker. While fully subscribing to the +fundamental ideas of Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Henslow's</hi> lecture, <hi rend='italic'>Lord Kelvin</hi> said, he could +not assent to the proposition that natural science neither affirms nor +denies the origin of life by a creative force. He stated that natural +science <emph>does</emph>, positively, assert a creative force. Science forces every +one to recognize a miracle within himself. That we are living, and +moving, and existing, is not due to dead matter, but to a creating and +directing force, and science forces us to accept this assumption as a +tenet of faith. <hi rend='italic'>Lord Kelvin</hi> subsequently amplified these remarks in +an article that appeared in the <hi rend='italic'>Nineteenth Century</hi>, of June, 1903. It +concludes with the admonition, not to be afraid to think independently. +<q>If you reason sharply, you will be forced by science to believe in +God, who is the basis of all religion. You will find science to be, not +an opponent of religion, but a support</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Times</hi>, May 8 and 15, 1903). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Such were the views of those to whom, in the first place, the +establishment of natural science and its progress are due. It +is not science and strong reasoning that lead away from God, +but the lack of true science. <hi rend='italic'>Bacon</hi> said: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Leviores gustus in +philosophia movere fortasse animum ad atheismum, sed pleniores +haustus ad Deum reducere</foreign>. Another thing must be observed. +Among those earnest men, earnest in the investigation +of nature, and earnest in the consideration of questions of a +supernatural life, there are many who made the religious question +the subject of mature study, and who were well acquainted +with the objections against religion and Christianity. But +they cling to their religious persuasion only the more firmly. +We may be reminded of men like <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Cauchy</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi>, and +<hi rend='italic'>Maxwell</hi>. +</p> + +<p> +To speak of authorities, what comparison is there between +these great scientists and discoverers, and those who are satisfied +with the general assurance that <q>any one who has grasped the +<pb n='217'/><anchor id='Pg217'/> +elements of natural sciences must become a monist,</q> and <q>that +the supernatural exists only in the brain of the visionary and +ignorant,</q> that, <q>in the same measure in which the victorious +progress of modern knowledge of nature surpasses the scientific +achievements of former centuries, the untenableness of all mystical +views of life that tend to harness the reason in the yoke of +so-called revelation has been made clear</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>), and who +in such assurance find perfect intellectual gratification. They +recall an incident at the Congress of English natural scientists, +held at Belfast in 1874, when <hi rend='italic'>Tyndall</hi> delivered from the platform +a materialistic lecture, and among the audience sat <hi rend='italic'>Maxwell</hi>, +his superior in scientific research, who put down the lecture +in doggerel rhyme, in a humorous vein, of course, but not without +deserved sarcasm. +</p> + +<p> +We proceed on our way, trying to make haste, and omitting +many names that might be mentioned, limiting ourselves to +the most prominent ones. +</p> + +<p> +Among the chemists we name <hi rend='italic'>Lavoisier</hi>. A martyr to his +science, he died under the guillotine of the Revolution in +1794; he had remained true to his Christian faith. The Swede, +<hi rend='italic'>J. Berzelius</hi> (died 1848), openly professed his belief in God. +<hi rend='italic'>Thénard</hi> (died 1859), the discoverer of boron, of a blue dye +named after him, and of many other chemicals, was a staunch +Catholic. The pastor of St. Sulpice could testify at his funeral +as follows: <q>He attended church every Sunday, eyes and heart +fixed on his prayer-book, and on solemn Feast days he received +Holy Communion.... With <hi rend='italic'>Baron Thénard</hi> one of the greatest +benefactors of my poor people is gone</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kneller</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Dumas</hi> (died 1884), who is esteemed by his pupil <hi rend='italic'>Pasteur</hi> +as the peer of <hi rend='italic'>Lavoisier</hi>, was also a practical Catholic, as was +his compatriot <hi rend='italic'>Chevreul</hi> (died 1889). This great man had +the rare good fortune to be present at his own centenary in +1886. At this great celebration he received an address by +the Berlin Academy, stating that his name had a prominent +place on the list of the great scientists who had carried the +scientific repute of France to all quarters of the globe. When, +in view of the mundane character of the celebration, the liberal +press endeavoured to rank him among the representatives of +<pb n='218'/><anchor id='Pg218'/> +unbelieving science, and this question being discussed in public, +<hi rend='italic'>Chevreul</hi> felt himself constrained to proclaim his religious persuasion +openly in a letter to <hi rend='italic'>Count de Montravel</hi>, in which he +said: <q>I am simply a scientist, but those who know me, know +also that I was born a Catholic, that I lead a Catholic life, +and that I want to die a Catholic</q> (Civilta Cattolica, 1891, +292). +</p> + +<p> +Two Germans may conclude the list of chemists, <hi rend='italic'>Schoenbein</hi> +(died 1868) and <hi rend='italic'>J. Liebig</hi> (died 1873). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In his diary, <q>Menschen und Dinge,</q> 1885 (page 29), <hi rend='italic'>Schoenbein</hi> +writes: <q>There are still people who fancy in their limited mind that, +the deeper the human intellect penetrates the secrets of nature, the more +extensive its knowledge, the wider its conception of the exterior +world, the more it must forget the cause of all things. Many have +gone even so far as to assert that natural science must lead to the +denial of God. This view is without all foundation. He, who contemplates +with open eyes, daily and hourly, the doings and workings of +nature, will not only believe, but will actually perceive, and be firmly +convinced, that there is not the smallest place in space where the +divine does not reveal itself in the most magnificent and admirable +way.</q> And in a similar strain <hi rend='italic'>Liebig</hi> writes: <q>Indeed, the greatness +and infinite wisdom of the Creator of the world can be realized only +by him who endeavours to understand His ideas as laid down in that +immense book,—nature, in comparison to which everything that men +otherwise know and tell of Him, appears like empty talk</q> (Die Chemie +in ihrer Anwendung). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Now let us turn to the geographers. We merely mention +<hi rend='italic'>Ritter</hi> (died 1859), the man who raised geography to the dignity +of a science; he was a faithful Protestant, while biassed against +the Catholic Church. In spite of this, a Catholic historian, +<hi rend='italic'>J. Janssen</hi>, has sketched his life, in which we read: <q>Firm in +his belief in the living God, and in the Incarnate Son of God, +His Redeemer, he furnishes a clear and convincing proof that +this faith, far from being a contradiction to natural science ... +alone enables man to acquire an extensive and deep knowledge +of nature.</q> We give only passing notice to the founder of scientific +crystallography, <hi rend='italic'>R. Hauy</hi> (died 1822), who was a dutiful +Catholic priest. The geologists now will get a hearing. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Among them we meet, in the first place, the noted geologist and +zoölogist, <hi rend='italic'>Cuvier</hi> (died 1832), a faithful Protestant: also the foremost +French geologist of his time, <hi rend='italic'>L. De Beaumont</hi> (died 1874), <q>a Christian +<pb n='219'/><anchor id='Pg219'/> +in all things and a steadfast Christian ... which he remained through +his whole life;</q> so <hi rend='italic'>Dumas</hi> testifies of him in his obituary (Comptes +Rendus, 1874). Then there is <hi rend='italic'>J. Barrande</hi>, the untiring explorer of +the antediluvian strata of Bohemia. He came in 1830 to Bohemia with +the banished royal family, as <hi rend='italic'>Chambord's</hi> teacher, and died 1883 at +Frohsdorf near Vienna. He was a pious Catholic. The volumes of his +works are nearly all dated on Catholic feasts. The recently deceased +French geologist, <hi rend='italic'>A. De Lapparent</hi>, was a practical Catholic, and such +were the two Belgian geologists, <hi rend='italic'>J. d'Omalius</hi> (died 1875), and <hi rend='italic'>A. +Dumont</hi> (died 1857), to both of whom Belgium owes its geological exploration. +The English geologists, <hi rend='italic'>Buckland</hi> (died 1856), <hi rend='italic'>Hitchcock</hi> +(died 1864), and <hi rend='italic'>A. Sedgwick</hi> (died 1872), were ministers of the English +Church. <hi rend='italic'>J. Dwight Dana</hi> (died 1895), the foremost geologist of +North America, begins his celebrated text-book of geology with a +homage to his Creator, and concludes it by paying tribute to Holy +Writ. <hi rend='italic'>W. Dawson</hi> (died 1899) the worthy geological explorer of his +native land, Canada, published several apologetic dissertations on the +Bible and Nature. A kindred sentiment animated the German scientists, +<hi rend='italic'>Bischof</hi> (died 1870), <hi rend='italic'>Quenstedt</hi> (died 1898), the geologist of +Suabia <hi rend='italic'>Pfaff</hi> (died 1886), <hi rend='italic'>Schafhæutl</hi> (died 1890), and the equally +pious as learned Swiss geologist <hi rend='italic'>O. Heer</hi> (died 1883). They all have +much to say about the greatness of their Creator, but not a word of any +insolvable contradictions between the Bible and geologic research. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +As a last division of an imposing phalanx, there are now the +biologists and physiologists. Modern biology, as the science of +life, has in the eyes of many accomplished the bold deed of +demonstrating the superfluity of a soul distinct from matter. +Claim is made that it has sufficiently explained the sensitive and +mental life by the sole agency of physical and chemical forces, +and thus to have removed the boundary between live and dead +matter. It is said, further, that biology in conjunction with +zoölogy and botany has furnished proof that the wonderful +organic forms of life may be explained by purely natural +causes, without having to assume as an ultimate cause the act +of a higher intelligence; that a never ceasing evolution is the +sole ultimate cause,—creation is made superfluous by evolution. +Biology is thus claimed to have refuted the old dualism of +soul and matter, of world and God, and to have awarded the +palm to monism. +</p> + +<p> +Are the eminent representatives of this science really the +materialists and monists they would have to be, if all this +were true? The foremost physiologist of the nineteenth century +was <hi rend='italic'>J. Müller</hi> (died 1858), buried in the Catholic cemetery at +<pb n='220'/><anchor id='Pg220'/> +Berlin. He was a decided opponent of materialism; he not +only contended for the existence of a spiritual soul, but also +for an immaterial vital force in plants. <hi rend='italic'>Th. Schwann</hi> (died +1882) is the founder of the cellular theory. In the year +1839 he accepted a call to take the chair of anatomy at the +Catholic University of Louvain. One of the most prominent +physiologists of the nineteenth century was <hi rend='italic'>A. Volkmann</hi> +(died 1877). He was a stout champion of the spirituality +and immortality of the soul, of purposive cause in animated +beings, and an opponent of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin's</hi> theory. <hi rend='italic'>G. J. Mendel</hi> +(died 1884) became by his work on <hi rend='italic'>Experimenting with Hybrid +Plants</hi> the pioneer of the modern theory of hereditary transmission, +adopted by modern biology; and scientists like <hi rend='italic'>H. de +Vries</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Correns</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Tschermak</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Bateson</hi> followed his lead. <q>His +important laws of hereditary transmission are the best so far +offered by the research in this field</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Muckermann</hi>, Grundriss +der Biologie). He was a Catholic priest, and the abbot of the +Augustinian Monastery at Old-Brünn. <hi rend='italic'>Karl von Vierordt</hi> (died +1884) is well known by his <q>Manual of Physiology,</q> still in +demand as a reference book in the libraries of universities. In +1865 he delivered a speech at the Tübingen University on the +unity of science, concluding with this appeal to the students: +<q>Until your religious notions become clear by a mature insight, +trust in the well-meant assurance that the belief in the divinity +of the religion of Jesus has not been put falsely into your +heart. True piety is equally remote from narrow pietism as +from freethinking indifference; it leaves to reason its full rights, +but it also assures to us the faculty to be aware, in joyful confidence +in Almighty Providence, of an immaterial and for us +eternal destiny.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Ch. Ehrenberg</hi> (died 1876) is the explorer +of the world of little things: of infusoria and protozoa. He +did not countenance <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel's</hi> materialism nor <hi rend='italic'>Darwin's</hi> denial +of teleology: to him they were fantastic theories and romances. +A friend of his, and of the same mind, was <hi rend='italic'>K. von Martius</hi>, +who admired God's wisdom in the wonders of the world of vegetation. +Long before his death he ordered his burial dress to +be made of white cloth embroidered with a green cross,—<q>a +cross because I am a Christian, and green in honour of botany.</q> +<pb n='221'/><anchor id='Pg221'/> +Another renowned name may be mentioned, that of the Austrian +anatomist <hi rend='italic'>J. Hyrtl</hi> (died 1894). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In the years when materialism was flourishing, <hi rend='italic'>Hyrtl</hi> was painfully +grieved to see science fall into disrepute through the fault of individuals. +He gave vent to his indignation on the occasion of the fifth +centenary of the Vienna University (1864), when, having been elected +Rector, and being considered the greatest celebrity at that college, he delivered +his inaugural speech on the materialistic tendency of our times. +Summing up he said: <q>I am at a loss how to explain what scientific +grounds there are to defend and fortify a revival of the old materialistic +views of an <hi rend='italic'>Epicurus</hi> and a <hi rend='italic'>Lucretius</hi>, and to endeavour to insure to +it a permanent rule.... Its success is due to the boldness of its assertion +and to the prevailing spirit of the time, which popularizes teachings +of this sort the more willingly, the more danger they seem to entail +for the existing order of things.</q> It was the same protest made +some years later by another famous scientist against <q>the dangerous +opinion that there were dogmas of natural science in inimical opposition +to the highest ideals of the human mind.</q> He stated that <q>it would be +a desirable reward for the efforts of our foremost naturalists to erect +with the aid of anthropology a barrier to this error which is so +demoralizing for the people</q> (<hi rend='italic'>J. Ranke</hi>, Der Mensch, 1894). +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Hyrtl's</hi> speech at once aroused a storm of indignation in the liberal +press of Vienna, and the great scientist, until then honoured and extolled, +became the object of denunciation and sneer. Thus was the +freedom of science understood in those circles. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> was much vexed by two fellow scientists, <hi rend='italic'>M. von Baer</hi> (died +1876) and <hi rend='italic'>G. J. Romanes</hi> (died 1894). <hi rend='italic'>Baer</hi> was prominent in the +science of evolution. He was led to theism by his studies. <hi rend='italic'>Romanes</hi>, +a friend of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, had been an adherent of materialism, but through +serious study he returned to the belief in God and Christianity. His +posthumous work, <q>Thoughts on Religion, a scientist's religious evolution +from Atheism to Christianity,</q> furnishes a brilliant voucher +thereof. <hi rend='italic'>Romanes's</hi> conversion was a sad blow for <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>. However, +he constructed an explanation to give himself comfort. <q>When the news +of this conversion,</q> he wrote, <q>was first circulated by a friend of +<hi rend='italic'>Romanes</hi>, a zealous English Churchman, the assumption suggested itself +to me that it was all a mystification and invention, for it is +known that the fanatical champions of ecclesiastical superstition have +never hesitated to pervert the truth to save their dogma. Later on, +however, it was found that it was really an instance (analogous to +the case of old <hi rend='italic'>Baer</hi>) of one of those interesting psychological metamorphoses +with which I have dealt in Chapter 6 of my book. <hi rend='italic'>Romanes</hi> +was in his last years a sick man. It was pathological debility. The +first condition, however, of an unbiassed, pure conception of reason is +the normal condition of its organ. His phronema was not in a normal +condition.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> will have to rank among those whose phronema is +not in a normal condition a good many other natural scientists; indeed, +most of those of higher standing. +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='222'/><anchor id='Pg222'/> + +<p> +Every one knows the celebrated name of <hi rend='italic'>Louis Pasteur</hi> (died +1895), the discoverer of various bacteria, of whom <hi rend='italic'>Huxley</hi> says +that his manifold inventions have repaid to French industry the +five billion francs indemnity which France had to pay to Germany +after the war. It is equally well known that <hi rend='italic'>Pasteur</hi> +was to his death a staunch Catholic. <q>As his soul departed, he +held in his hands a small cross of brass, and his last words were +the confession of faith and hope</q> (La Science Catholique, X, +1896, 182). The story is told that one of his pupils asked him +how he could be so religious after all his thinking and studying. +<hi rend='italic'>Pasteur</hi> replied: <q>Just because I have thought and studied, I +remained religious like a man of Brittany, and had I thought +and studied still more, I would be as religious as a woman of +Brittany</q> (Revue des Questions Scientifiques, 1896, 385). +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In the year 1859 great commotion was caused in the world of +thought by the appearance of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin's</hi> book on the <q>Origin of Species.</q> +It stated that the various species had gradually evolved from most +simple, primordial forms, and this by natural selection; not, therefore, +in the sense that the Creator had put the laws of evolution into +nature, but that in the struggle for existence the survival of the +fittest was the result of natural selection. Soon it was claimed that +man, too, in his rational life, was the result of an evolution from +animal stages; indeed, the whole universe had arisen by the survival +of the accidentally fittest. Evolution was to be substituted for creation. +In Germany, <hi rend='italic'>E. Haeckel</hi> was the man who considered it the +task of his life to spread those ideas as the established result of +science. In our own time a belated high tide is sweeping over the +intellectual lowlands. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> himself was an agnostic; to begin with, he lacked all religious +training; his mother had died early, his father was a free-thinker, +and his education at school was rationalistic. The doubt of +all higher truths, and finally, according to his own confession, the +doubt respecting the power of reason, were his companions through +life. Yet he confesses: <q>... I never was an atheist in the sense that +I would deny the existence of God. I think, in general (and more so +the older I grow), but not at all times, agnostic would be a more +accurate description of my state of mind</q> (<hi rend='italic'>F. Darwin</hi>, The Life and +Letters of Charles Darwin, I, 304). Remarkable, however, is the following +passage at the end of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin's</hi> chief work: <q>It is a great +belief, indeed, of the Creator having breathed the embryo of all life +surrounding us into a few forms, or in but one single form, and +an endless row of most beautiful, most wonderful forms having evolved +and are still evolving from such a simple beginning, while our planet, +following the laws of gravitation, has steadily revolved in its circle.</q> +<pb n='223'/><anchor id='Pg223'/> +What <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> was lacking in a high degree was a philosophical training +of the mind. +</p> + +<p> +In itself the <emph>theory of evolution</emph>, which asserts the variability of +species of animals and plants, is by no means opposed to religious +truths. It neither includes a necessity of assuming the origin of the +human soul from the essentially lower animal soul, nor is it an +atheistic theory. On the contrary, such an evolution would most +clearly certify to God's wisdom in laying such a wonderful basis for +the progress of nature, provided this theory could be proved by scientific +facts; indeed, for an evolution within narrow limits, circumstantial +evidence is not lacking. That there is no contradiction between +the theory of evolution and the fundamental tenets of Christian Creed +is sufficiently shown by the representatives of the theory. <hi rend='italic'>Lamarck</hi> +(died 1829) and <hi rend='italic'>Saint-Hilaire</hi> (died 1844), both of them representatives +of the theory of evolution long before <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, believed in God. +There were, prior to <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, two celebrated Catholic scientists, to wit, +<hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>d'Omalius</hi>, who had decidedly taken the part of <hi rend='italic'>Saint-Hilaire</hi> +in his controversy with <hi rend='italic'>Cuvier</hi>. And also after <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, a +number of Christian and Catholic scientists have contended for the +idea of evolution, as, for instance, the pious Swiss geologist, <hi rend='italic'>Heer</hi>; +also <hi rend='italic'>Quenstedt</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Volkmann</hi>, and the American geologist, <hi rend='italic'>Ch. Lyell</hi>. +More recently Catholic scientists have expressed themselves in favour +of the theory of evolution; for instance, the noted zoölogist, <hi rend='italic'>E. Wasmann</hi>, +and the geologists <hi rend='italic'>Lossen</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>W. Waagen</hi>, both of whom had to +bring bitter sacrifices in their career on account of their Catholic faith. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Mature Science Respects Faith.</head> + +<p> +There have now passed in review the great natural scientists +of the past, those living at the present time we shall leave to the +judgment of the future. Is it true, then, that the foremost representatives +of natural science had the conviction that science +and faith are incompatible? No! On the contrary, most of +them, and the greatest of them, have professed the fundamental +truths of religion, or have even been devout Christians +themselves. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Theism in natural science, or, if you prefer, in natural philosophy,</q> +so says a modern scientist, <q>rests upon the basis of a fundamental +view which an old formula has clothed in words as simple as they are +sublime: <q>I believe in God, the Almighty Creator of Heaven and of +Earth.</q> This confession does not cling to theistic scientists like an +egg-shell from the time of unsophisticated childhood faith; it is the +result of their entire scientific thought and judgment. This conviction +has been professed by the most discerning natural scientists of all ages</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>J. Reinke</hi>, Naturwissenschaft und Religion). +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='224'/><anchor id='Pg224'/> + +<p> +Still it cannot be denied that some of the great scientists +were of different mind, men like <hi rend='italic'>R. von Virchow</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Tyndall</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>A. +von Humboldt</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond</hi>. Nor shall it be disputed +that, at the present time, a large number of men of average +learning are on the side of unbelief. However, it must not be +forgotten that unbelief is more frequently pretended to the outside +world for appearance's sake than it really dwells in the +heart. This is, to a great extent, due to human respect, to public +opinion, and the prevailing tendency of science. Then again, +it must be remembered, that religiously minded scientists are +often crowded out from the schools of science, with the natural +result that the others predominate. Another point to be borne +in mind is that the atheistic representatives of science are doing +more to get themselves talked about; they are seeking more +diligently the attention of public opinion. Men like <hi rend='italic'>Tyndall</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Vogt</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Moleschott</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, are known in larger circles than +men like <hi rend='italic'>Faraday</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Maxwell</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Volta</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Pasteur</hi>, who, engaged +in serious work, gave no time to making propaganda, as +the others did by lecturing and popular writing for materialistic +and monistic views in the name of science; they had no +desire for the limelight of attention, and for posing as personified +science. +</p> + +<p> +All this does not change the fact that a very large number, indeed +the largest number, of natural scientists of first rank were +believers in God, or of pious, Christian mind. And that is +of the greater importance. To do pioneer work in the field of +science, to give impetus, to make progress, requires a penetrating +and, at the same time, an independent mind, one that +can rise above conventional commonplace. The fact that such +men have largely been very religious, that they never belittled +religion, weighs much more in the balance than the disparagement +of inferior minds. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +These, then, are the often-cited witnesses for the incompatibility +of science and faith. While only taken from the province +of natural science, they may in our case be deemed representative +of science in general. For natural science is generally regarded +the most exact of all, and as the one which, more than +<pb n='225'/><anchor id='Pg225'/> +any other, has the scientific spirit said to be incompatible with +faith, and which, by many, is believed to have brought about in +the modern world of thought the irreconcilable conflict between +faith and science. This is not so! Such antagonism does <hi rend='italic'>not</hi> +exist. It cannot exist, because it is certain from the outset +that both faith and science unfold the truth. Truth, however, +can never be in conflict with truth. Nor has that antagonism +ever existed historically in any of the great representatives of +science. This antagonism is fictitious, it is false in its very +essence. It is fabricated, either by distorting faith into a blind +belief of absurd things, or else by distorting the human faculty +of conception into infallible omniscience, or, the other extreme, +by denying its faculty for a higher perception. +</p> + +<p> +Faith has nothing to fear from a mature science that has +arrived at the conviction of its cognitions, nor has it anything +to fear from the great intellects who reason profoundly and +seriously. But it has to fear mock-science and ignorance, and +those small and superficial minds that aim at stretching their +pseudo-knowledge to a gigantic infallibility. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='227'/><anchor id='Pg227'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Third Section. The Liberal Freedom of Research.</head> + +<pb n='229'/><anchor id='Pg229'/> + +<div> +<head>The Yoke of the Sun.</head> + +<p> +The gifted Danish writer and convert, <hi rend='italic'>J. Jörgensen</hi>, tells +a parable which is pregnant with thought. <q>In the +midst of a large rye-field,</q> he relates, <q rend='pre'>there stood a tall +poplar, with other trees standing nearby. One day the poplar +turned to the other trees and plants, and thus began +to speak: <q>Sisters and brothers! To us, the glorious tribe +of plants, belongs the earth, and everything upon it is dependent +on us. We fertilize and feed ourselves, while beasts +and men are fed and clothed by us. Indeed, the earth itself +feeds upon our decaying leaves, upon our boughs and branches. +There is only one power in the world our existence and growth +is said to depend on; I refer to the Sun. I purposely used the +words, <q>is said,</q> because I am sure that we do not depend +on the Sun. This doctrine of sunlight being a necessity and +a benefit to our plant life is nothing but a superstition, which +at last ought to give way to enlightenment.</q> Here the poplar +paused. From some old oaks and elms in the neighbouring +grove there came signs of disapproval, but the inconstant rye-field +muttered assent. Thus encouraged and raising its voice +the poplar continued: <q>I know well that there is a musty faction +amongst us which clings obstinately to obsolete views. However, +I have confidence in the independence of the younger generation +of plants. They will realize the baseness of continuing to do +homage to an absurd superstition. Our freeborn heads shall +never bow to a yoke, not even to the yoke of the Sun. Down, +therefore, with that yoke! And free from restraint there will +arise a free and beautiful generation that will astonish the +world.</q> The poplar paused for the second time, and now the +applause was long and loud, the fields cheered and the groves +gave boisterous applause, so that the disapproval of a few old +<pb n='230'/><anchor id='Pg230'/> +trees could not be heard. The following days looked upon +an odd spectacle. At daybreak, when the Sun ascended and +cast its first rays over the landscape, the flowers closed their +cups and denied admission, as if asleep; the leaves no longer +turned toward the Sun. But when the dispenser of warmth +and light had gone down behind the hills, the gayly coloured +flowers opened in the dim starlight, as if now the time had +come for them to grow and blossom.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>Alas, how sad was the fate of these poor rebels! The rye +soon began to languish till it lay prone on the ground; green +leaves turned yellow, the flowers drooped, faded and withered. +Then the plants began to grumble at the poplar. There it +stood, its leaves a seared yellow. <q>What simpletons you are, +brothers and sisters!</q> it said. <q>Can't you see that now you +are much more like yourselves than under the rule of the Sun? +Now you are refined, independent beings, well rid of the sluggish +health of yore.</q> There were some who still believed what +the poplar said. <q>We are independent, we are unfettered,</q> they +clamoured, till the last spark of life was gone. Not long after +the poplar, too, stood there with its branches bared,—it had +died. The farmers, however, complained about the failing of +the crop, and consoled themselves by hoping for better success +the next year.</q> +</p> + +<p> +A parable of deep meaning! It may serve as an illustration +for the facts stated, and for those yet to be dealt with. +</p> + +<p> +According to the Christian view, man is dependent on +his Creator, from whom he receives life and light, and, in +the same way, his mind depends on truth, by which it lives as +the plants live, by the light and the warmth of the sun. To +many generations this was self-evident, and withal they felt +themselves free, because they looked for the freedom only +of the dependent creature. And, keeping within these bounds, +they had a cheerful existence in the happy possession of their +faith, contented and serene in the possession of truth; their +higher spiritual life throve and flourished, promoted by the +Eternal Giver of light and warmth, who held out to them the +prospect of completing their mental life in the contemplation +of His eternal truth. +</p> + +<pb n='231'/><anchor id='Pg231'/> + +<p> +What the fathers deemed self-evident has now become a +problem to their sons. What to their fathers was lofty and +revered, the things to which they ascribed their ennoblement, +have become to the sons an obstacle to free development. +They have forgotten what they are. They demand independence +and freest realization of their own individuality, in +which they see the sole source of greatness and progress. In +every dependence they perceive a hampering of their natural +development. +</p> + +<p> +We have in previous chapters become acquainted with this +<emph>liberal freedom</emph>, particularly in reasoning and in scientific research, +the child of the philosophy of humanitarianism and subjectivism, +the philosophy that emancipates man from God's +rule, from the immutable religious truths, and which sees in +this emancipation perfect freedom. We have listened to the +arguments in behalf of this position, especially arguments +against the duty to believe. All that we have set forth hitherto +was to prove that such a freedom is not required. In the +faithful adherence to God's revelation and to His Church there +is no degradation of reason, an exaltation rather; because +to join in the eternal reason of its Creator is not bondage but +a privilege. +</p> + +<p> +We proceed. We shall demonstrate that this freedom is not +only not required, but that it is entirely untenable and ruinous; +that it is especially so because it is urged and demanded in +the name of truth and proper order, in the name of uplift of +human intellectual life, and of progress towards real enlightenment. +We shall see that this freedom is not a liberation from +mean fetters, but simply a revolt against the natural order, +an apostasy from God and the supernatural which one shuns. +Hence, not the natural and orderly development of the human +individual, but a principle of negation under the garb of freedom, +the severance of man from the sources of his greatness and +strength, the perversion of true science; not the only admissible +scientific method, but an altogether unscientific method. We +shall show that it becomes thereby the principle of mental +pauperization and decay, a principle of mental decadence, which +in the sphere of idealism will reduce mankind to beggary. +<pb n='232'/><anchor id='Pg232'/> +Thereby public testimony is given that in the midst of mankind +there is needed an intelligent force that preserves, with conscientious +earnestness and unyielding firmness, the intellectual +inheritance of mankind, the ideal treasures of truth and of +morality. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='233'/><anchor id='Pg233'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter I. Free From The Yoke Of The Supernatural.</head> + +<div> +<head>Ignoramus, We Ignore.</head> + +<p> +The liberal principle of research rests on the basis of +the humanitarian view of the world, which makes man +autonomous, and causes him to turn his eyes from above and +downward, and to fix them upon his earthly existence. To +remain true to its own idea, this liberal science will feel the +necessity to sever itself gradually from the restraining powers +of the world beyond, and to shun the thought of God and of +His divine influence and supremacy over the world and human +life. It must resent such truths as a burdensome yoke that +oppresses human freedom. +</p> + +<p> +And to this thought it remains faithful, if not in all its +representatives, then at any rate in a good many of them. With +unremitting persistency it enforces in all its domains the demand: +<emph>Science must not reckon with supernatural factors</emph>. +Ignoramus is its watchword, <q>we do not know it</q> in the +sense of its usual agnosticism, but <q>we ignore it</q> in the spirit of +the impulse which dreads the loss of its freedom through higher +powers. Creation and miracles, divine revelation and the God-imposed +duty of belief, it does not know. A moral law, as given +by God, does not exist for this science. It wants nothing to do +with a religion that worships a personal God, much less with +a supernatural religion, with mysteries, miracles, and grace. It +praises all the higher that modern religion of sentiment, without +dogmas and religious duties, which sovereign man creates for +himself, a poetical adornment of his individuality, a religion he +need not ask what he owes it, but rather what it offers him. All +connection with the world beyond is cut off. Man is now free in +his own house. We shall show this in detail, by the testimony +<pb n='234'/><anchor id='Pg234'/> +chiefly of men generally accepted as foremost representatives +of modern science. We do not assert, however, that all representatives +of modern science belong here. Far be it from us +to sit in judgment as to the good intentions of the champions +of liberal science. We know very well that an education indifferent +to religion, early habitual association with the ideas +of a sceptical, naturalistic philosophy, the acquisition of prejudices +and unsolved difficulties, a continuous stay in an intellectual +atmosphere foreign and inimical to religious belief—all +this, we well understand, will gradually rob the mind of +all inclination and unbiassed judgment for religious truth, +and thus make for apostasy from religion. Nor do we assert +that the idea of God and Christianity are extinct in the hearts +of the representatives of liberal science, but we do assert that +their <emph>science</emph> no longer wants to know God and His true religion, +that only too often it is in the grip of a Theophobia, +which slinks past God and His works, with its eyes designedly +averted. +</p> + +<p> +At the same time the <emph>unprepossession of this science</emph> will +be made clear. <q>A feeling of degradation pervades the German +university circles,</q> so the learned <hi rend='italic'>Mommsen</hi> expressed himself +some years ago when Strassburg was to get a Catholic chair +of history; therefore a Catholic who takes his Catholic view +of the world as his guide cannot be unprepossessed, hence cannot +be a true scientist. We have become used to this reproach; +nevertheless it is very painful to a Catholic, especially when he +devotes his life to scientific work. The other side claims very +emphatically to have a monopoly on unprepossession and truthfulness; +it gives most solemn assurances of not desiring anything +but the truth, of serving the truth alone, with persevering +unselfishness, unaffected by disposition and party interest, and +that it has its unbiassed spiritual eye turned only to the chaste +sunlight of truth. Hence, we may be permitted to inquire +whether these assurances square with the facts. As they demand +belief, we may also demand proofs; and if those assurances +are accompanied by sharp accusations, the accused will +have even a greater right to examine the deeds and records of +this assertive science. +</p> + +<pb n='235'/><anchor id='Pg235'/> + +<p> +What about the unprepossession of liberal science, especially +in the province of philosophy and religion? It cannot be our +intention to explore the whole territory in every direction. +We shall keep to the central and main road, the road to which +chiefly lead all other roads of life, we mean the attitude of +this school of research towards the world beyond. We find +this attitude to be one of persistent ignoring! Science cannot +acknowledge the supernatural; this presumption, unproved and +impossible of proof, it never loses sight of, it is even made a scientific +principle, which is called: +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Principle of Exclusive Natural Causation.</head> + +<p> +This principle demands that everything belonging to nature +in its widest sense, consequently all objects and events of irrational +nature and of human life, must be explained by natural +causes only; supernatural factors must not be brought in. To +assume an interposition by God, in the form of creation, miracle, +or revelation, is unscientific; he who does so is not a true scientist. +A presumption, a mandate of truly stupendous enormity! +How can it be proved that there is no God, that creation, +miracles, the supernatural origin of religion, are impossible +things? And if they are possible, why should it be forbidden +to make use of them in explaining facts which cannot otherwise +be explained? +</p> + +<p> +However, it is readily admitted that the principle is merely +a postulate, an <emph>unproved</emph> presumption. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>The postulate of exclusive natural causation tells us that natural +events can have their causes only in other natural events, and +not in conditions lying outside of the continuity of natural causality</q>; +so <hi rend='italic'>W. Wundt</hi>. This is a <q>postulate, accepted by modern natural +science partly tacitly, partly by open profession.</q> <q>Even where an +exact deduction is not possible, natural science nevertheless acts under +this supposition. It never will consider a natural event to be causally +explained, if it is attempted to derive that event from other conditions +than preceding natural events.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Professor <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi> protests against alliance with the Catholic Church, +for the reason that the latter does not acknowledge the fundamental +presumption of all scientific research, namely, the uninterrupted natural +causation, and because the Church is essentially founded on supernatural +presumptions. Prof. <hi rend='italic'>A. Messer</hi> thinks he has proved sufficiently +the untenableness of the Catholic faith by the simple appeal to this +<pb n='236'/><anchor id='Pg236'/> +presumption: <q>Natural sciences rest upon the presumption that everything +is causally determined. This means, that the same causes must +be followed by the same effects, and all natural events take their course +according to invariable laws. It is against this presumption that +the Church exacts a belief in miracles, in immediate divine manifestations, +not explainable by natural causes. <emph>God</emph> is not a causal +factor in the eyes of natural science, because everything, and for that +very reason, nothing, could be explained through Him.</q> We see that +the principle is expressly admitted to be a mere presumption. <q>I +concede readily,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, <q>that the law of natural causation +is not a proven fact, but a demand or presumption with which reason +approaches the task of explaining natural phenomena. But this +postulate ... is the hard-fought victory of long scientific effort.... +Gradually there were eliminated from the course of nature demoniacal +influence and the miraculous intervention of God, and in their stead +the idea of natural causation was installed.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is merely another expression for the same thing if one +calls, with <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, the unbroken causal connection <q>the fundamental +presumption of all our natural research</q>; or concludes, +with <hi rend='italic'>A. Drews</hi>, that the assumption of a transcendental +God, beyond the visible, and in causal relation to the world, +destroys the universal conformity to laws in the world, the +self-evident presumption of all scientific knowledge; or one +may say, with <hi rend='italic'>F. Steudel</hi>, <q>The theory of unbroken causal connection +has become the fundamental presupposition of all philosophical +explanation of world happenings. This finally disposes +of a transcendental God, together with his empiric correlative, +the miracle, as a philosophical explanation of the world.</q> The +same result is achieved by declaring evolution from natural +factors as the universal world-law. +</p> + +<p> +<q><emph>I Know not God the Father, Almighty Creator of +Heaven and of Earth</emph></q> +</p> + +<p> +With inexorable persistency this principle is now applied +wherever science meets with God and the world beyond. +Hence, let us proceed on our way and halt at some points to +watch this science at work. +</p> + +<p> +The unbiassed reasoning of the mind shows that this world, +limited and finite, in all its phenomena accidental and perishable, +cannot have in itself the cause of its existence, hence, that it +<pb n='237'/><anchor id='Pg237'/> +demands a supernatural creative cause. This solution of the +question is by no means demonstrated by liberal science as +untenable, it is simply declined. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Natural science, once for all, has not the least occasion to assume +a supernatural act of creation</q>; this we are told by the famous +historian of materialism, <hi rend='italic'>F. A. Lange</hi>. <q>To fall back upon explanations +of this sort amounts always to straying from scientific grounds, +which not only is not permissible in a scientific investigation, but +should never enter into consideration.</q> And <hi rend='italic'>L. Plate</hi> states: <q>A creation +of matter we cannot assume, nor would such an assumption be +any explanation at all; at most, it would be tantamount to exchanging +one question mark for another. We natural scientists are modest +enough, as matters now stand, to forego a further solution of the question.</q> +They will subscribe to <hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond's</hi> <q>ignoramus</q> rather +than assume the only solution of the question, an act of creation. +This scientist, asking himself the question, from where the world-matter +received its first impulse, argues: <q>Let us try to imagine a +primordial condition, where matter had not yet been influenced by +any cause, and we arrive at the conclusion that matter an infinite +time ago was inactive, and equally distributed in infinite space. +Since a supernatural impulse does not fit into our theory of the universe, +an adequate cause for the first action is lacking.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Thus they frankly violate the scientific method that demands +acceptance of the explanation demonstrated as necessary, +and violate it only for the reason to dodge the acknowledgment +of a Creator. This is not science, but politics. +</p> + +<p> +But let us ask, Why should it be against science to reckon +with supernatural factors? Is it because we cannot disclose +with certainty the other world? Are they not aware that such +a principle is opposed by the conviction of all mankind, that +always held these conceptions to be the highest, and therefore +not to be considered illusions? Do they not see, moreover, +how they involve themselves in flagrant contradictions? Does +not science by means of its laws of reasoning, especially +on the principle of causality, constantly infer invisible causes +from visible facts? From physical-chemical facts ether and +physical atoms, which no man has ever seen, are deduced: from +falling stones and the movement of astral bodies is inferred a +universal gravitation, undemonstrable by experience; from an +anonymous letter is deduced an author. The astronomer deduces +from certain facts that fixed stars must have dark companions, +<pb n='238'/><anchor id='Pg238'/> +visible to no one; from disturbances in the movements +of Uranus <hi rend='italic'>Leverrier</hi> found by calculation the existence +and location of Neptune, then not as yet discovered. Hence, +what does it mean: <q>to fall back upon explanations of this +sort always amounts to straying away from scientific ground</q>? +Let us imagine a noble vessel on the high seas to have become +the victim of a catastrophe. It lies now at the bottom of the +sea. Fishes come from all sides and stop musingly before the +strange visitor. Whence did this come? Was it made out of +water? Impossible! Did it creep up from the bottom of the +sea? No! At last a fish reasons: <q>What we see here has +undoubtedly come down to us from a higher world, far above +us, and invisible to us.</q> The speech meets with approval. But +another fish objects: <q>Nonsense! To fall back upon explanations +of this sort always amounts to straying away from the +scientific grounds on which we fish must stand. We cannot +assume such a world to exist, because this would offend against +the first principle of our science, the principle of the exclusive +natural causation of sea and water.</q> With these words the +speaker departs, wagging his tail, his speech having been received +with stupefaction rather than with understanding. +</p> + +<p> +To this philosophy may be applied the word of the Apostle: +<q>Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit</q> +(Col. ii. 8). No, it is not the spirit of true science +that opposes the belief in supernatural factors, but it is the +desertion of the traditions and the spirit of a better science. +To the representatives of paganism, to <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> and others, the +highest goal of human quest of truth was to find God and +to worship Him. For the great leaders in recent natural science, +<hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Linné</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Boyle</hi>,<hi rend='italic'> Volta</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Faraday</hi>, and +<hi rend='italic'>Maxwell</hi>, the highest achievement was to point to God's wisdom +in the wonderful works of nature; their science ended +in prayer. A principle of unbroken natural causation, as a +boycott of the Deity, was to them not a postulate of science +but an abomination. They were carried by a conviction expressed +by a later scientist, <hi rend='italic'>W. Thomson</hi>, in the following words: +<q>Fear not to be independent thinkers! If you think vigorously +enough, you will be forced by science to believe in a God, Who +<pb n='239'/><anchor id='Pg239'/> +is the basis of all religion</q>; and expressed by <hi rend='italic'>R. Mayer</hi> in the +following words: <q>True philosophy must not and cannot be +anything else but the propædeutics of the Christian religion.</q> +</p> + +<p> +But let us proceed. We have before us an astonishing <emph>order</emph>, +we behold uncounted wonders of well-designed purpose in the +world. The question suggests itself: Whence this Order? The +watch originates from the intelligence of a maker, an accident +could not have produced it; hence also the great world-machine +must have had an intelligent maker. This is the logic of unbiassed +reason. But the principles of liberal research object to +the acceptance of this explanation. What is theirs? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +There have been some scientists endeavouring to discover the purposeless +in nature, and they have gleaned various things. <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> invented +for them the name Dysteleologists; and this is now the name they go by. +Why the destruction of so many living embryos? What is the purpose +of pain, of the vermiform appendix? <q>To what purpose is the immense +belt of desert extending through both large continents of the Old World? +Could the Sahara not have been avoided?... Indeed, numerous forms +of life we cannot look at but with repugnance and horror; for instance, +the parasitical beings.</q> ... (<hi rend='italic'>F. Paulsen</hi>). Hence the order claimed +for the world does not exist, on the contrary, <q>it is beyond doubt that +the most essential means of nature is of a kind which can only be +put on a level with the blindest accident</q> (<hi rend='italic'>F. A. Lange</hi>). But they +do not feel satisfied with this. They feel that even if all these things +were actually purposeless, they would amount only to a few drops +in the immense ocean of order which still has to be explained. At +most, they would form but a few typographical errors in an otherwise +ingenious book,—errors that evidently are no proof that the whole +book is a mass of nonsense and not dictated by reason. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +There appears to them, like a rescuing plank in a shipwreck, +<hi rend='italic'>Darwin's</hi> Natural Selection. The artistic forms in the kingdom +of plants and animals arose, says <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, by the fact that, +among numerous seemingly tentative formations, there were +some useful organs or their rudiments which survived in the +struggle for existence and became hereditary in the offspring, +while others disappeared. It was seen very soon, and it is even +better understood to-day, that this enormous feat of <q>natural +selection</q> is contrary to the facts, and would be, above all, an +incredible accident. Nevertheless <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> has become the rescuing +knight for many who became alarmed about the threatening +Supernaturalism. +</p> + +<pb n='240'/><anchor id='Pg240'/> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond</hi> speaks very frankly: <q>Albeit, in holding to this +theory we may feel like a man kept from drowning only by holding +firmly to a plank just strong enough to keep him afloat. But when +we have to choose between a plank and death, the preference will +decidedly be with the plank.</q> The same idea is expressed somewhat +more gracefully by <hi rend='italic'>W. Ostwald</hi>: <q>That the quite complicated problem +concerning the purposiveness of organism loses its character of a riddle, +at least in principle, and assumes the aspect of a scientific task, all +by virtue of this simple thought ... is a gain that cannot be sufficiently +appreciated.</q> With vehement plainness <hi rend='italic'>H. Spitzer</hi> maintains: +<q>Purposiveness in nature, which was feared by positive research like a +ghost, because it really seemed only to be due to the intervention of +ghosts in the course of the world, has now been traced by <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> to +its origin from natural causes, and he thereby made it a fit object for +the science that is at home only in the sphere of natural causes.</q> <q>To +the height of this point of view,</q> <hi rend='italic'>D. F. Strauss</hi> boasts, <q>we have been +led by modern natural research in <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>.</q><note place='foot'>Others take refuge in the fantastic theory of an <q>All-Animation.</q> +According to it all organisms, including trees, shrubs, grasses, are +possessed of a soulful sensation and feeling for the purposes they +serve, and for the elaborate actions they undertake: this is the +reason for their efficacy, not because a wise Creator had arranged them +thus. <hi rend='italic'>R. H. Francé</hi> exclaims triumphantly: <q>When the powers that be +should ask in their dissatisfaction: <q>Where has God a place in your +system?</q> we can answer calmly: <q>We do not need the hypothesis of a +personal God.</q></q> God is superfluous—this is the precious gain which +this unscientific explanation is to yield.</note> +</p> + +<p> +At any rate one thing is settled: <q>The theological explanation must +be rejected,</q> as <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> puts it. <q>It sees in adaptation the proof for +the love and kindness of a Creator, who has ordered all organisms most +conformable to their purpose. Natural Science cannot accept such an +explanation.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Is this the boasted spirit of truthfulness, which desires only +the truth,—but is evading it persistently? Is this that unbiassed +eye that seeks only the truth? Truly, it seems to be +unsound, since it cannot bear the rays of truth. Let us go to +another workshop of liberal science. It is known now that our +earth has once been a ball of glowing fluid, with a temperature +in which no living being could exist. Consequently the latter +must have appeared at a later stage of evolution. As a fact, +palæontology does not show any remnants of organisms in the +lower strata of the earth. Now again a question suggests itself +to the scientist, <emph>Whence did the first life come from?</emph> We +have the choice of only two explanations: either it has risen +by itself, out of unorganic, dead matter, or it was produced by +<pb n='241'/><anchor id='Pg241'/> +the hand of a Creator: either by <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>generatio aequivoca</foreign> or the +act of creation. Now there has never been observed a <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>generatio +aequivoca</foreign>, as is testified to by natural science itself, and never +has it been accomplished in the laboratory. Therefore, inasmuch +as the natural laws of olden times cannot have been any +different from those of the present, there has never been a +primordial genesis. Do they perhaps give the Creator his due +here, where the case is so obvious? Let us see. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The noted zoölogist, <hi rend='italic'>R. Hertwig</hi>, writes: <q>Inasmuch as there has +doubtless been a time when the prevailing temperature of our globe +made any life impossible, there must have been a time when life on it +arose either by an act of creation or by primordial genesis. If, conformable +to the spirit of natural sciences, we are relying only on natural +forces for an explanation of natural phenomena, then we are necessarily +led to the hypothesis of primordial genesis,</q> although it contradicts all +experience. But the deduction is only brought forth as a <q>logical postulate</q>: +there <q>must</q> be such genesis after creation is eliminated. +<q>We natural scientists say,</q> states <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi>, <q>that all living beings must +have originated some time in former geological periods ... from dead, +unorganic matter; to assume a creation would be no explanation at all, +exactly as it would be no explanation to assume the creation of +matter.</q> Which philosophy teaches that it is not an explanation of a +fact to assume for it the only reasonable cause? But just this cause +they do not want. <hi rend='italic'>Virchow</hi> says in this respect: <q>If I do not wish +to assume a creative act, if I desire to explain the matter in my way, +then it is clear that I must resort to <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>generatio aequivoca</foreign>. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Tertium non +datur.</foreign> There is nothing else left, if one once has said: <q>I do not +accept creation, but I want an explanation of it.</q> If this is the first +thesis, the second thesis is, ergo, I accept the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>generatio aequivoca</foreign>. +<emph>But we have no actual proof of it.</emph></q> Hence <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> only follows the +lead of others when he writes: <q>We admit that this process (<emph>primordial +genesis</emph>) must remain a pure hypothesis, as long as it is not directly +observed or duplicated by experiment. But I repeat that this hypothesis +is indispensable for the entire coherence of the history of natural +creation. Unless you accept the hypothesis of primordial genesis at +this one point in the theory of evolution, you must take refuge in the +miracle of a supernatural creation.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Is this science, or is it not rather Theophobia? Does the +freedom of science consist, first of all, in the privilege of +emancipating one's self from truth, whenever truth is not to +one's taste? True, liberal science will then be free from distasteful +truths, but all the more shackled by its irreligious prejudices. +</p> + +<p> +In modern times, the <emph>theory of evolution</emph> is in high favour. +<pb n='242'/><anchor id='Pg242'/> +On earth we do not only see life, but life in a great variety +of forms, from plant to man. The question, whence this +variety, admits in its turn only of the alternative: either it +was immediately created by God's hand, or it is the result of +a slow evolution from common original forms. Whether there +has been an evolution within the vegetable and animal kingdom +is a problem for natural science. But it is a philosophical +question, whether the essentially superior human soul, endowed +with spirituality and reason, could have evolved from the inferior +animal soul. Philosophy must answer: No, just as impossible +as to evolve ten from two, or a whole book from a +single proofsheet. Faith says the human soul is created by +God. We do not intend to discuss the problem here any further, +but shall only point out how science here, too, expressly or tacitly, +is determined very energetically by the presumption of the +exclusive natural causation; this is applied to the entire theory +of evolution, but especially in regard to man. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>The notion of the evolution of the living world on earth,</q> thus +states <hi rend='italic'>Weismann</hi> quite significantly, <q>extends far beyond the provinces +of individual sciences, and it influences our entire range of +thoughts. This notion means nothing less than the elimination of +miracle from our knowledge of nature, and the classification of the +phenomena of life on an equal footing with the rest of natural events.</q> +The guiding motive is plainly in evidence. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The aim to eliminate the <q>miracle of creation</q> is manifested +even more conspicuously in the question about the origin +of man: man with his entire equipment, intellectual as well +as cultural, must have evolved upward from the most imperfect +rudiments; this is regarded as a self-evident proposition. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>M. Hoernes</hi>, for instance, writes: <q>The Cosmogonies, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, the +theories of creation, of all nations ascribe the origin of man to a +supernatural act of creation, whereby the Creator is imagined as a +human being, because at the intellectual stage corresponding to these +notions something created could only be conceived as something formed, +something constructed.</q> Thus the theory of creation, and the Christian +doctrine of the genesis of man, is disposed of as a notion of the +lower intellect. <q>On the contrary, we are taught by science to look +upon the highest mammals as our nearest blood-relatives.</q> This <q>we +are taught by science,</q> although it is confessed: <q>We know the fact of +the existence of the man of the fourth, or glacial, period, but we have +<pb n='243'/><anchor id='Pg243'/> +not a solitary fact that would throw light upon his origin and his +previous existence.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>The theory of miracles can be given up only when we shall cease +to contemplate man as a creature apart from the rest of creation, and +look upon him as a being developed within creation to what he is now. +Then, however, reason and language, as well as man himself, are the +products of a continuous evolution,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi> in his <q>Psychology of +Nations.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Müller</hi>, in a text-book on the science of language, argues: +<q>According to <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> and to modern natural science, man was not created +but has evolved from a lower organism during a process of thousands +and thousands of years.... For this reason, we must (?) assume +that the first language of primitive man could not have ranked above +the speech by which animals living in families communicate with each +other.</q> +</p> + +<p> +On the basis of this truly dogmatical presumption, that the <q>miracle +theory</q> of creation must not be accepted, they proceed then to construe +one hypothesis upon another, of the origin of language, of thought, of +conscience, of religion, according to the method of <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Spencer</hi>, +hypotheses of utmost arbitrariness, and frequently most fantastic. +<q>Ethnographical researches,</q> so we are told by <hi rend='italic'>E. Lehmann</hi>, <q>made by +travellers, representatives of science and of practical life, in all parts +of the globe, ... are starting to-day, almost without exception, from +the tacit presumption that the civilization of peoples living in the primitive +state represent an early and low stage in a historical chain of +evolution.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +All these are suitable commentaries upon the trite proposition +that natural science, or more generally science, is incompatible +with religious belief. Of course research, like that +described above, does not agree with Faith. But the fault +lies in its unscientific method, rather than in its scientific +character, in its latent atheistic presumption which prevents an +unbiassed conception of truth. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In February, 1907, the well-known biologist and priest of the +Jesuit order, <hi rend='italic'>E. Wasmann</hi>, gave three lectures in Berlin on the theory +of evolution, before a large audience; they were followed on the fourth +evening by a discussion, in the course of which eleven opponents voiced +for nearly three hours their objections and attacks, to which <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi> +replied briefly at midnight, but little time having been allotted to him +for this purpose. <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi>, as well as his chief opponent, Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> +of Berlin, have published the arguments on both sides with notes, +comments, and supplements. The report of Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> lays stress +upon the assertion, which had also formed the refrain of all opposing +speeches, viz., <q>the discussion has shown, in the first place, that true +research in natural science is impossible for those taking the position +of the Roman Catholic Church; secondly, the glaring and irreconcilable +<pb n='244'/><anchor id='Pg244'/> +opposition of the scientific theory of the world to the Orthodox-Christian +view was sharply manifested.</q> In examining how this was +demonstrated by this particular natural science, one meets with a +painful surprise. +</p> + +<p> +Even the facts concerning the arrangements for the discussion make +an unpleasant impression. It is true, <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> accused <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi> of calumny +on account of the latter's complaint. However, upon comparing +closely the statements of both, the following facts remain undisputed. +<hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi> notified <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> that he desired to speak twice during the discussion, +and that the entire discussion should not last much over two +hours. <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> promised to arrange matters accordingly. But on the forenoon +of February 18th, the opponents held a meeting, <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> presiding, +and they resolved, without the least notification to <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi>, that there +should be eleven speakers against <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi>, and that the latter should +reply but once, at the end. Only just before the beginning of the +discussion, the same evening, <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> informed <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi> of the arrangement, +making it practically impossible for the latter to change the +situation. Furthermore, upon <hi rend='italic'>Plate's</hi> proposal, an intermission of five +minutes before the appearance of the tenth speaker was decided upon, +<q>in order to give those in the audience, who might find the session +too exhausting, a chance to leave.</q> Thus the audience was to be +subjected for three long hours to the influence of heated attacks on +Theism, Christianity, and the Church, and without hearing the reply +unless they held out from half-past eight in the evening to half-past +twelve in the morning. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Plate's</hi> Monism rejects principally everything metaphysical: <q>Monism +is the short term for the natural science view of the world, that +rejects all preternatural and supernatural ideas.</q> Solutions, not given +by the natural sciences, simply do not exist for him; for him the sun +sets on the horizon of his natural science. <q>Natural laws comprise +all that we are able to fathom: what is behind them, or what is living +in them and operates in them, is the ultimate question for philosophy, +and there one thinks this way, another that way</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi>). Nevertheless, +he knows that <q>Out of nothing can come nothing: hence matter is +eternal,</q> and he is certain that there is no personal God, no angel nor +devil, no beyond nor immortality. Whoever fails to think the same +way is no scientist, he is not even a man of sound reason: because +<q>he who has grasped even the elements of natural science, the unity +and strict conformity to law of the natural forces, and has a head +for sound reasoning, will become a monist all by himself, while the +rest are past help, anyhow.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>The Polytheism of the orthodox Church,</q> he says further, referring +to the mystery of the Trinity, <q>is irrational</q>; for <q>Common Sense +says that 3 is not equal to 1, nor 1 to 3,</q> and this is sufficient for +<hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi>. <q>Trinity, the Incarnation of the Son of God, Christ's Ascension +and His descent into hell, Original Sin, Redemption from sin by +Christ's sacrifice, Angels and Devils, the Immaculate Conception, the +Infallibility of the Pope, all these and many other doctrines of the +orthodox Church are thrown to the winds by anybody convinced of the +permanence and imperviousness of the natural laws.</q> This again is +<pb n='245'/><anchor id='Pg245'/> +sufficient for him. <q>The question whether God is personal or impersonal,</q> +says he, in another place, <q>should never be raised: it is +just as preposterous as the question whether God has eyes or not.</q> +Another of his arguments reads: <q>If the body after death can become +dust by natural means, then there must have been conditions under +which the dust became by natural means a body.</q> An analogous argument +would be: <q>If a book can of itself finally wear away into withered +and loosened leaves, then there must be conditions under which the +perfect book could originate all by itself, and without Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi>, out +of withered, loose leaves.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> assures us: <q>I do not know anything about metaphysics.</q> +We do not want to dispute that. It is regrettable that so many +scientists of our times are betraying a pitiable lack of philosophical +training, a lack which becomes a social danger if they, nevertheless, +yield to the temptation to invade the domain of Philosophy. Even +the Protestant scientist <hi rend='italic'>G. Wobbermin</hi> in referring to the above-mentioned +discussion remarked: <q><hi rend='italic'>Wasmann's</hi> opponents on that +evening have betrayed without exception a really amazing lack of +philosophical training.</q> In glaring contrast with this ignorance +stands their intolerance for any different theory of the world. Because +he thinks as a Christian, <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi> is peremptorily expelled +from the ranks of natural scientists. <q><hi rend='italic'>Father Wasmann</hi> is not a +true natural scientist, he is not a true scholar.</q> With this crushing +verdict Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> concluded his speech. He repeats this finding on +the last page of his book in conspicuous type: <q><hi rend='italic'>Father Wasmann</hi>, +S. J., no true natural scientist, no true scholar.</q> That his opponent, in +answer to questions that go beyond mere natural science, is giving +philosophical replies, in accord with the doctrine of Christianity, is +explained by <q>his voluntary or involuntary submission to the Church,</q> +<q>natural science bows to Theology.</q> He therefore lacks <q>the freedom +of thought and of deduction.</q> Sophistical stunts in the service +of intolerance! But let us proceed on our way. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The compulsory dogma of the inadmissibility of a supernatural +order of the world, and of its operation in the visible +world, becomes most manifest when liberal science comes in +contact with the miracle. Forsooth, it shirks this contact. But +time and again, now and in the past, it is confronted by clearly +attested facts and it cannot avoid noticing them. However, it is +determined from the outset that miracles are impossible. Of +course, this cannot be proved except by the presumption that +there is no supermundane God. Even the agnostic <hi rend='italic'>Stuart Mill</hi> +admits that if the existence of God is conceded, an effect produced +by His will, which in every instance owes its origin to +its creator, appears no longer as a purely arbitrary hypothesis, +but must be considered a serious possibility (Essays, 1874). +<pb n='246'/><anchor id='Pg246'/> +Generally, however, liberal science does not try hard to demonstrate +in a scientific way the impossibility. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>It is my unyielding conviction,</q> so speaks <hi rend='italic'>A. Harnack</hi>, and his +is perhaps the most telling expression of this dogmatic mood, <q>that +anything that happens within time and space is subject to the laws of +motion. Hence, that in this sense, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, of interrupting the natural +connection, there cannot be any miracles.</q> One simply does not believe +such things. <q>That a tempest at sea,</q> thus <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> again, <q>could +have been stilled by a word we do not believe, nor shall we ever again +believe it.</q> Similarly reads <hi rend='italic'>Baumgarten's</hi> declaration regarding the +resurrection of Christ: <q>Even if all the reports had been written on the +third day, and had been transmitted to us as a certainty ... nevertheless +modern consciousness could not accept the story.</q> And <hi rend='italic'>W. +Foerster</hi> writes: <q>The supposition that such interferences do not occur, +and that everything in the world is advancing steadily and in +accordance with fixed laws, forms the indispensable presumption of +scientific research.</q> And <hi rend='italic'>H. von Sybel</hi> holds <q>An absolute concord +with the laws of evolution, a common level in the existence of things +terrestrial, forms the presumption of all knowledge: it stands and +falls with it.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +This is the presumption, from which is drawn the most extravagant +conclusion, which, though so manifestly improper, is +made the basis for rejecting the entire supernatural religion of +Christianity. Because God's Incarnate Son, in a small town of +Palestine, once turned water into wine, will the Christian housewife +lose her confidence in the stability of water? When it was +suddenly discovered that the orbit of the planet Uranus was +not a perfect ellipsis, as required by the law of <hi rend='italic'>Kepler</hi>, was it +thought that these deviations are impossible because there must +not be any exception to the law of perfect elliptical movements? +Happily, this law continued to be accepted without +deeming an irregularity impossible, and shortly afterwards +Neptune was discovered and found to be the cause of the disturbance. +But anything miraculous, no matter how well proven, +must be considered unacceptable by reason of such unsound +presumption. Philosophical a-priorism is superior to facts. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Thus <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> tells in his work <q>De civitate Dei</q> (1. xxii. c. 8) +of a number of miracles happening in his time, of which he had +knowledge either as eye-witness or by authentical reports from eye-witnesses. +<hi rend='italic'>E. Zeller</hi> renders judgment on the historical value of the +statement as follows: <q>The narrator is a contemporary, and partly even +<pb n='247'/><anchor id='Pg247'/> +an eye-witness, of the events reported: by virtue of his episcopal office +he is particularly commissioned to closely investigate them; we know +him as a man overtowering his contemporaries in intellect and knowledge, +second to none in religious zeal, strong faith, and moral earnestness. +The wonderful events happened to well-known persons, sometimes +in the presence of big crowds of people; they were attested and +recorded by official order.</q> Hence the statement must be accepted without +objection. But must it not also be believed? is the query of an unbiassed +listener. Not in the judgment of one who is in the tyrannical +yoke of his presumptions. <q>What are we to say about it?</q> continues +<hi rend='italic'>Zeller</hi>, and finds that <q>in this unparalleled aggregation of miracles we +can after all see nothing else but a proof of the credulity of that age.</q> +The report is incontestable, but it must not be believed! +</p> + +<p> +In our times <hi rend='italic'>Lourdes</hi> has become the scene of events which are +founded on facts, and the miraculous character has been proven at least +of some of them. <hi rend='italic'>Bertrin</hi>, in his <q>Histoire critique des evénéments de +Lourdes,</q> deals with the attitude of the physicians toward the miracles. +The believing physician can enter upon his investigation without prejudice: +not so the unbelieving physician and scientist, who is shackled +by his prejudice against the possibility of miracles. Of this a few +examples: +</p> + +<p> +<q>How did you get cured?</q> was the question put by a physician to a +young woman who, after having suffered for four years from a suppurating +inflammation of the hip joints, complicated by caries, had a +few days previously suddenly regained her full health. Pains and +sores had disappeared. <q>By whom was I cured? By the Blessed +Virgin!</q> <q>Never mind the Blessed Virgin,</q> replied the physician. +<q>Young woman, why don't you admit that you had been assured in +advance that you would get well. You were told that, once in Lourdes, +you would suddenly rise from the box wherein you were lying. That +sort of thing happens—we call it suggestion.</q> The girl replied, +unhesitatingly, that it did not happen this way at all. Finally the +physician offered her money if she would admit having really been +cured by suggestion. The girl declined the offer.—Another girl +arrived in Lourdes, with a physician's attestation that she was a +consumptive. She is cured after the first bath. At the bureau of +verification her lungs were found to be no longer diseased. Her physician's +statement having been very brief, a telegram was sent to him +as a matter of precaution, asking him for another statement without, +however, informing him of the cure. The physician immediately wired +back: <q>She is a consumptive.</q> This was also the opinion of other +physicians who had treated the girl. The girl joyfully returns home, +and hurries to her physician, requesting him to certify to her cure. +He does so quite reluctantly. Upon reading his certificate, she discovers +that it said she had been cured, but only of a <emph>cough</emph>. The +case of consumption of his original testimonial had changed into a +cough. His dread of a miracle had induced this physician to commit a +falsehood. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>A. Rambacher</hi>, as he relates in a pamphlet, sent the scientific treatise +on Lourdes by Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Boissarie</hi> to Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, with the request to read +<pb n='248'/><anchor id='Pg248'/> +it, in order to gain a better notion of the existence of a supernatural +world. After some urging he finally received the following reply, which +speaks volumes for the attitude of the natural scientist towards facts: +<q>With many thanks I hereby return the book by Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Boissarie</hi> on the +Great Cures of Lourdes which you sent me. The perusal of the same +has convinced me anew of the tremendous power of superstition (glorified +as <q>pious belief</q>) of naïve credulity (without critical examination), +and of contagious collective suggestion, as well as of the cunning +of the clergy, exploiting them for their gain.... The physicians, +said to testify in behalf of the <q>miracles</q> and the supernatural phenomena, +are either ignorant and undiscerning quacks, or positive +frauds in collusion with the priests. The most accurate description of +the gigantic swindle of Lourdes I know of, is that of <hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi> in his well-known +novel.... With repeated thanks for your kindness ... <hi rend='italic'>Ernst +Haeckel</hi>.</q> Against all the facts in evidence this dogmatic scientist was +safely intrenched behind the stone wall of his presumptions. He knew +in advance that everything was superstition or the fraud of cunning +priests, that all physicians who certified to cures were quacks and +cheats. <hi rend='italic'>Zola's</hi> tendentious romance considered the best historical source! +Mention should be made here how this celebrated novelist dealt with +facts at Lourdes. In the year 1892, the time of the great pilgrimage, +<hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi> went to Lourdes. He wanted to observe and then tell what he had +seen. An historical novel it was to be; time and again he had proclaimed +in the newspapers that he would tell the whole truth. At +Lourdes all doors were opened to him; he had admittance anywhere; +he could interview and obtain explanations at will. How he kept his +promise to report the truth may be shown by a single instance: <hi rend='italic'>Marie +Lebranchu</hi> came to Lourdes on August 20, 1892, suffering from incurable +consumption. She was suddenly cured, and never had a relapse. +One year after her cure she returned to the miraculous Grotto. The +excellent condition of her lungs was again verified. Now, what does +<hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi> make of this event? In his novel the cured girl suffers a terrible +relapse upon her first return home, <q>a brutal return of the disease +which remained victorious,</q> we read in <hi rend='italic'>Zola's</hi> book. One day, the +president of the Lourdes Bureau of Investigation introduced himself +to <hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi> in Paris, and asked him <q>How dare you let <hi rend='italic'>Marie Lebranchu</hi> +die in your novel; you know very well that she is alive and just as +well as you and I.</q> <q>What do I care,</q> was <hi rend='italic'>Zola's</hi> reply, <q>I think +I have the right to do as I please with the characters I create.</q> If +a romancer desires to avail himself of this privilege he certainly has +not the right to proclaim his novels as truthful historical writings, much +less may others see in such a novel the <q>most accurate description of +the events at Lourdes.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Renan</hi> at one time said: <q>Oh, if we just once might have a miracle +brought before professional scientists! But, alas! this will never +happen!</q> He borrowed this saying from <hi rend='italic'>Voltaire</hi>, with the difference +that the latter demanded God to perform a miracle before the Academy +of Sciences, as if there were need for miracles in a physical or chemical +laboratory. Those who desire in earnest to investigate miracles ought +to go where they are performed. And even there, where the eyes can +<pb n='249'/><anchor id='Pg249'/> +see them, it also takes good will to acknowledge them. In this respect +an interview is instructive which <hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi> once had with an editor. +The latter asked: <q>If you were witness to a miracle, that would +occur under strictest conditions suggested by yourself, would you +acknowledge the miracle? Would you then accept the teachings of +the faith?</q> After a few moments of serious thought, <hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi> replied: +<q>I do not know, but I do not believe I would</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Bertrin</hi>). On April +7, 1875, there came to the Belgian sanctuary, Oostacker, a Flemish +labourer, by name <hi rend='italic'>Peter de Rudder</hi>, whose leg had eight years before +been broken below the knee, and who was then suffering from two suppurating +cancerous sores, that had formed at the place of the fracture +and on the foot. He suddenly was entirely cured. The case was investigated +in a most exact way. In 1900 a treatise concerning the case +was published by three physicians. <hi rend='italic'>E. Wasmann</hi> had as early as +1900 published a short extract of it in the <q>Stimmen aus Maria +Laach.</q> In February, 1907, when, at Berlin, he delivered his lectures +which were followed by a discussion, his opponents, headed by Prof. +<hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi>, did not know of this article. When they learned of it, some +time afterwards, he was put under the ban because he <q>had degraded +himself to the position of a charlatan by vouching with his scientific +repute for the happening of a miraculous cure</q>; and they said <q>they +would fight him in the same way as they would fight every quack, but as +a scientist he was discarded.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> had on the evening of the discussion +asked of the assembled scientists the question: <q>Have we ever observed +anything like a suspension of the natural laws? The reply to it +is an unconditional <q>we have not</q>; consequently Theism becomes inadmissible +to the natural scientist.</q> Here, in the <hi rend='italic'>de Rudder</hi> case, is +found the required instance. But <hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi> knows, in advance of any +investigation, that it is a fairy tale, believed without critical examination. +And Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Hansemann</hi>, another opposing speaker of that +evening, subsequently sent word to <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi> that: <q>One can pretty well +judge what to think of a natural scientist who publishes such stuff. +For this reason I now declare that I shall never in future, no matter +how or where, enter into discussion of matters of natural science +with Mr. <hi rend='italic'>Wasmann</hi>.</q> When on a certain occasion <hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi> was advised +that some facts did not agree with his philosophical notions, he replied: +<q>The more pity for the facts.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The English natural scientist, <hi rend='italic'>W. Thomson</hi>, once said before +the British Society at Edinburgh: <q>Science is bound by +eternal honour to face fearlessly every problem that can be +clearly laid before it.</q> The equally famous <hi rend='italic'>Faraday</hi>, in the +name of empirical research, demands of its adherents the determination +to stand or to fall with the results of a direct +appeal to the facts in the first place, and with the strict logical +deductions therefrom in the second. In general these principles +are adhered to so long as religious notions are not encountered. +<pb n='250'/><anchor id='Pg250'/> +But as soon as these are sighted, the engine is reversed, and all +scientific principles are forgotten. +</p> + +<p> +A science led by this spirit will set out to emancipate +man's moral conduct of life from God and religion. Indeed, +the first postulate of modern ethics directs that <emph>morality</emph> must +be <emph>independent of religion</emph>. That God and eternal salvation +is the end of man, the ultimate norm of his moral life, that +God's Command is the ultimate reason of the moral obligation, +and divine sanction its strongest support, it does not +want to acknowledge. Here, too, we find the principle of +natural causality in operation. <q>As in physics God's will must +not be made to serve as an explanation, so likewise in the theory +of moral phenomena. Both the natural and the moral world, +as they exist, may point beyond themselves to something transcendental. +But we cannot admit the transcendental ... a +scientific explanation will have to be wholly immanent, and +anthropological</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). According to this approved principle +of ignoration, the supreme aim and law of a morality without +religion is <emph>man</emph>, his earthly happiness, and his culture. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Its aims, according to Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>, one of its noted champions, are: +<q>Promotion of moral life, fostering of a refined humanity, development +of a true fellow-feeling, without the religious and metaphysical notions +upon which mankind hitherto has mostly built its ethical ideals.</q> +<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> was the pioneer here: <q>In so far as morality is based on the conception +of man as a free, being, it requires neither the idea of a +superior being to make him cognizant of his duties, nor any motive +but the law itself in order to observe it ... hence morality for its +own sake does not by any means need religion.</q> This is the viewpoint +of the autonomous man, who is his own law. <q>From the viewpoint +of authority,</q> so tells us <hi rend='italic'>E. von Hartmann</hi>, <q>autonomy does +not mean anything else but that in ethical matters I am for myself the +highest court without appeal.... The God, Who in the beginning spoke +to His children from a fiery cloud ... has descended into our bosom, +and, transformed into our own being, speaks out of us as a moral +autonomy.</q> <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Diis extinctis successit humanitas.</foreign> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +<q>Although an individual representative of science may be a +believer in God in his private life,</q> so argues the English philosopher, +<hi rend='italic'>W. James</hi>, <q>at any rate the times have passed when +it could be said that the heavens announce to science the glory +of God, and that the heaven shows the works of His hands.</q> +<pb n='251'/><anchor id='Pg251'/> +The flight from divinity, atheism open or disguised, is the +psychological effect of the liberal principle. Free thought +aims to free man of all authority, it aims at severing from +religion his entire existence, marriage, state, schools, and likewise +science. <q>It is undeniable,</q> we hear from the lips of champions +of modern man, standing on the pinnacle of religious +liberalism, <q>that there is a certain forsakenness in this existence +of man, as compared to a life brightened by the idea +of a God,</q> but that forsakenness is not purchased too dearly, +for <q>it is the solitude of autonomy, a possession so precious +that no price for it could be too high</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Carneri</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Indeed, these modern men use even plainer language: science +is applauded for having at last freed man from God. With +<hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> principle that we cannot know anything of the supernatural, +we are told, there <q>were thrown overboard the cosmogonic +notions of the Semitic races, notions that have so severely +oppressed our science and religion, and are still oppressing them.... +By this insight an idol is smashed. In a previous chapter +I called the Israelites the worshippers of abstract idols; +now, I believe, I shall be fully understood.</q> Indeed, we understand. +It means: Away with God. <q>This German metaphysics +frees us from idolatry and reveals to us the living divinity in +our own bosom</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Chamberlain</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +This is the manner in which this free thought, within science +and without, is fulfilling the earnest admonition of the Psalmist: +<q>Seek ye the Lord and be strengthened: seek His face evermore</q> +(Ps. civ. 4), and it turns into irony the words: <q>This +is the generation of them that seek Him, of them that seek the +face of the God of Jacob</q> (Ps. xxiii. 6). +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head><q>I Know not Jesus Christ, His Only Begotten Son, Our +Lord.</q></head> + +<p> +Where the thought of independence and of this world enslaves +the minds, and holds them captive in harsh aversion +to the supernatural, an objective judgment on the nature and +history of the Christian religion, to say nothing of the Catholic +Church, can hardly be hoped for. What may be expected is that +<pb n='252'/><anchor id='Pg252'/> +we will also meet here with a science which, with its hands +held before the eye that fears the light, wards off and combats +everything that is specifically Christian. It is to be feared only +that it will turn light into darkness regarding the view of +life, as also the doctrine and history, of the Christian religion. +</p> + +<p> +Regarding the Christian view of life we need only read the +superficial and yet so arrogant discussions of Christian philosophy, +as found in <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi>, or <hi rend='italic'>E. von Hartmann</hi>. +From this judicial bench the wisdom of Him, of Whom it is +said <q>And we saw His glory, full of grace and truth,</q> we see +condemned, if not even treated with subtle ridicule. +</p> + +<p> +Let us for instance take <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen's</hi> presentment of the <q>View +of Life under Christianity.</q> Whoever reads it, and believes it, +to him the teaching of Jesus Christ can only be, what the Apostle +said it was to the heathens, foolishness. No longer can he have +adoration for its Founder, but rather the pity that one has for +an enthusiastic visionary devoid of any knowledge of the world +and men. The wisdom taught by Christ is distorted into a +sombre grimace, while side by side with it the conception of +life of Hellenic paganism is transfigured into a beautiful ideal. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +We are told there: <q>While classical antiquity saw as the task +of life the perfect development of the natural powers and talents of +man, ... Christianity with clear consciousness makes the contrary +the goal of life.</q> <q>The cultivation and exercise of intellectual faculties +was of great importance to the Greeks.... Primitive Christianity +looks upon reason and natural cognition with indifference, even with +suspicion and contempt ... indeed, natural reason and knowledge are +an obstacle for the kingdom of God. Christianity at first was indifferent, +even inimical, not only to philosophy and science, but also to art and +poetry. It cuts off not only sensual but also æsthetical gratification,</q> +because <hi rend='italic'>St. John</hi> condemned the gratification of the eyes (which means +something quite different from æsthetical gratification) Christianity +is said to reject <q>the arts of the Muses and athletics: they belong to +that sowing of the flesh of which the harvest is perdition.</q> <q>What the +Christians valued highly was not erudition and eloquence, but silence. +Silence is the first thing recommended by <hi rend='italic'>Ambrose</hi></q> (and he the great and +renowned representative of early Christian eloquence!). There is more: +<q>In the primitive view the first virtue was valour, especially valour in +war; indeed, in Greek and Latin speech the word 'virtue' meant +valour; the Christian's virtue, however, is patience and endurance. He +does not draw the sword; to him are expressly forbidden not only anger, +hatred, and private revenge, but even litigation.</q> +</p> + +<pb n='253'/><anchor id='Pg253'/> + +<p> +In this tendentious strain <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> continues, with exaggerations and +misrepresentations that have nothing in common with science. According +to the Greek view, he says, high-mindedness was a great virtue, but, +naturally, the Christian is not allowed to have it; <q>the virtue of the +Christian is humility,</q> <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, in <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen's</hi> sense low-mindedness; this is +<q>the starting point of Christianity.</q> True, the author assures us that +Christianity of to-day is no longer the one he is describing; it has +adapted itself more to the world. But it is sad to have this gloomy, visionary +fanaticism described to us as the one which was taught by the +words of Jesus Himself. +</p> + +<p> +The adherent of this Christianity looks upon governments and their +aims as something essentially foreign to it, even to be an official +<q>would doubtless have been felt as a contradiction</q>; but a sudden +change is said to have taken place under <hi rend='italic'>Constantine</hi>. Earthly joys and +benefits, the holy ties of the family, those that Jesus in person blessed +at Cana, they were, according to <hi rend='italic'>St. Paul</hi>, so we are told, in the spirit +of Christ things to avoid and condemn. +</p> + +<p> +And how are these theological discoveries proven, what sources are +quoted in substantiation? By some arbitrarily selected passages of the +Scriptures, that one must hate father and mother, wife and child, +brother and sister; that the poor in spirit are blessed, that the lust +of the eye is sinful, that evil should not be resisted; and in quoting +these passages all scientific interpretation is carefully avoided, all the +writers who have amply explained them are ignored. And what the +scriptural passages fail to prove must be demonstrated by some extreme +statement borrowed from <hi rend='italic'>Tertullian</hi>, who is generally prone to +exaggeration. As a matter of course, gloomy Christianity then seems +inferior to the brilliancy of Greek paganism; Christianity is directly +a danger to civilization; it may be good enough for those tired of life. +<q>The objection has been made that the fulfilment of this command would +destroy our entire civilization. Most probably this would be the case. +But where is it written (in Holy Writ) that our civilization must be +preserved?</q> We have here the picture formed of the doctrine of +Christ by the world, whereof the Lord has predicted: the world will +hate you. <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> admits frankly: <q>Whence this hatred? Because +the Christian despises that which to the world is the highest good. +There can be no better reason for hating any one....</q> +</p> + +<p> +It is easy to understand that one who has for a long time mentally +abandoned his Christian faith, cannot carry in mind its picture as undistorted +as he did in his better days, and as would conform to reality. +But it is reprehensible to exhibit in public this picture, without having +previously and conscientiously examined the main lines, to see whether +they are not caricatures. And they are caricatures, traced by a hand +that is led by the mood of a secret anti-Christianity. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +A treatment identical with that of its view of life is accorded +to the <emph>doctrine and history of the Christian religion</emph>. +Not science and uncorrupted truthfulness, but antipathy, presumption, +harsh denial of everything divine, only too often point +<pb n='254'/><anchor id='Pg254'/> +the way. Let us listen again to the author named above, since +he knows to express modern thought with a clearness and precision +almost unequalled by any one else. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It made a painful impression to find in the Christmas number, 1908, +of the liberal-theological <q>Christliche Welt</q> a posthumous article +by <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Paulsen</hi>: <q>What think you of Christ: Whose Son is He?</q> The +article was without doubt one of the last he had written. It contains +the program of modern liberal science. <q>With the seventeenth +century,</q> we read there, <q>begins the reorganization of the theory of the +universe by science. Its general tendency may be described by the formula: +Elimination of the supernatural from the natural and historical +world.</q> <q>Consequently, no miracles in history, no supernatural birth, +no resurrection, no revelation, in fact no interference by the Eternal in +temporal events.</q> Hence, the man who <q>thinks scientifically <emph>in this +wise</emph> can have no doubt that the old ecclesiastical dogma cannot be reconciled +with scientific thought.</q> This, of course, amounts to a complete +renunciation of positive Christianity. +</p> + +<p> +This scientific thought, in the words of <hi rend='italic'>Baumgarten</hi>, <q>rejects any +projection of the supernatural into tangible reality</q>; especially is <q>the +metaphysical genesis and nature of the Saviour highly offensive to our +ethical consciousness,</q> even <q>absolutely unbearable.</q> The Christian +religion can no longer be permitted to overtower other religions by its +supernaturalness. <q>The distinction between a revealed and a natural +religion becomes an impossibility,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>W. Bousset</hi>. And <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi> declares: +<q>Christianity, as an <q>absolute</q> or a <q>revealed</q> religion, would +stand opposed to all other religious development, as an incommensurable +magnitude. This point of view, evidently, cannot be competent for our +speculations.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Having become the ruling mode of thought, these presumptions +determine from the outset the results to be obtained +by <q>research,</q> and they force it to violate its own method, so +that it may be dragged along the by-ways and false ways of +a mistaken, philosophical a-priorism, thereby making freedom +of science a mockery. From the abundant material at our disposal +let us take only one example, viz., the <emph>Modern Criticism +of the Gospels</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +The Gospels contain many records of facts of a supernatural +character, of miracles and prophecies. That these records are +necessarily false is the first principle of the historical, or +critical, method, as it is called. <q>As a miracle of itself is unthinkable, +so the miracles in the history of Christianity, and +in the Christianity of the New Testament, are likewise unthinkable. +<pb n='255'/><anchor id='Pg255'/> +Hence, when miracles are nevertheless narrated, +these narratives must be false, in as far as they report miracles: +that is, either the relation did not happen at all, or, if it did, +there was a sufficient natural explanation</q>; <q>the historian +must under all circumstances answer, <q>No,</q> to the question +whether the report of a miracle is worthy of belief</q> (<hi rend='italic'>T. Zeller</hi>). +Thus instructed, <q>unprejudiced</q> research proceeds to construct +its results of the investigation of the genuineness, time +and date, of the writing of the Gospels and of the Acts, as +well as of their credibility. Let us see how this is done. +</p> + +<p> +The tradition of the early Church, as well as intrinsic evidence, +testify that the first Gospel was really written by the +Apostle <hi rend='italic'>Matthew</hi>, and this certainly before the destruction of +Jerusalem. Liberal-Protestant criticism, however, assigns its +origin to a time after the year 70, chiefly for two reasons: +First, the striking prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem, +conforming so accurately to the actual event, could have been +written only after the year 70; otherwise it would have +amounted to a real prophecy subsequently fulfilled, a conclusion +that cannot be accepted. The second reason is this: The contents +of <hi rend='italic'>St. Matthew's</hi> Gospel is already wholly Catholic, hence +it must have been written during a later, Catholic, period. +For as there can be no influences from above, and as everything +is evolved in a natural way, the principle must govern: that the +more supernatural and the more dogmas, so much later the +period in question; at first there could have been only a religion +of sentiment without dogma, which gradually developed into +Catholic dogmatism. Similar are the presumptions which direct +modern research in respect to the genuineness of the other Gospels +and the Acts. A few proofs: +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Jülicher</hi> thinks that, <q>While we cannot go prior to the +beginning of the second century, because of external testimony, we cannot +on the other hand maintain a later date. The most probable time +for our Gospel is the one shortly before the year 100....</q> Why? <q>Because +the ill-fitting feature in the parable of the wedding feast, that +the king in his wrath, because his invitation had been made light of, +sent forth his armies and destroyed those murderers and burned up +their city, could hardly have been invented before the conflagration of +Jerusalem</q>—a prophecy, namely, of the coming destruction of Jerusalem +<pb n='256'/><anchor id='Pg256'/> +cannot be admitted. <q>But to my mind, the decisive point is +found in the religious position of <hi rend='italic'>Matthew</hi>. Despite his conservative +treatment of tradition, he already stands quite removed from its spirit; +he has written a Catholic Gospel.... To <hi rend='italic'>Matthew</hi> the congregation, +the Church, forms the highest court of discipline, being the administrator +of all heavenly goods of salvation; his Gospel determines who is to +rule, who to give laws: in its essential features the early Catholicism +is completed.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Jülicher</hi> arrives at a similar conclusion in his research on <hi rend='italic'>St. +Luke's</hi> Gospel: <q>That <hi rend='italic'>Luke's</hi> Gospel was written sometime after the +destruction of Jerusalem in 70 <hi rend='smallcaps'>a.d.</hi>, is proven beyond any doubt, by xxi. +22-24, where the terrible events of the Jewish war are <q>foretold.</q>... +All arguments in favor of a later date of writing concerning <hi rend='italic'>Matthew</hi> +hold good also of <hi rend='italic'>Luke</hi>.</q> Even more unreserved is <hi rend='italic'>O. Pfleiderer</hi>, until +recently a prominent representative of liberal-Protestant theology at +Berlin: <q>In this Gospel we find the elements of dogma, morals, the +constitution of the developing Catholic Church. Catholic is its trinitarian +formula of christening, this embryo of the Creed and of the +apostolic symbol. Catholic is its teaching of Christ ... Catholic, +the doctrine of Salvation ... Catholic are the morals ... Catholic, +finally, is the importance attached to <hi rend='italic'>Peter</hi> as the foundation of the +Church and as the bearer of the power of the key.</q> In regard to this +latter point <hi rend='italic'>Pfleiderer</hi> remarks expressly: <q>In spite of all attempts +of Protestants to mitigate this passage (Matt. xvi. 17-20) there is no +doubt that it contains the solemn proclamation of <hi rend='italic'>Peter's</hi> Primacy.</q> +The unsophisticated reader thereupon would be likely to deduct: If +the oldest Gospel is already Catholic, then it must be admitted that +earliest Christianity was already Catholic. In so reasoning he might +have rightly concluded, but he would have shown himself little acquainted +with the method of liberal science. This infers contrariwise: +early Christianity must not be Catholic, hence the Catholic Gospel cannot +be so old, it must be the fraudulent concoction of a later time; +<q>hence the origin of the Gospel of <hi rend='italic'>Matthew</hi> is to be put down not +before the time of <hi rend='italic'>Hadrian</hi>; in the fourth century rather than in the +third.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>A. Harnack</hi> fixes the date of the Gospel at shortly after 70, because +<q><hi rend='italic'>Matthew</hi>, as well as <hi rend='italic'>Luke</hi>, are presupposing the destruction of +Jerusalem. This follows with the greatest probability from Matt. +xxii. 7 (the parable of the marriage feast).</q> This is to be held also +of <hi rend='italic'>Luke's</hi> Gospel. <q>This much can be concluded without hesitation: +that, as now admitted by almost all critics, <hi rend='italic'>Luke's</hi> Gospel presupposes +the destruction of Jerusalem.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Remarkable is <hi rend='italic'>Harnack's</hi> latest attitude towards the Acts; it shows +again that the results of modern biblical criticism are less the results +of historical research than of philosophical presumptions. In his <q>Acts +of the Apostles</q> <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> admits: <q>Very weighty observations indicate +that the Acts (hence also the Gospels) were already written at the +beginning of the sixties.</q> In substantiation he cites not less than +six reasons which evidently prove it: they are based upon the principles +of sound historical criticism. <q>These are opposed solely by the observation +<pb n='257'/><anchor id='Pg257'/> +that the prophecy about the catastrophe of Jerusalem in +some striking points comes near to the actual event, and that the +reports about the Apparition and the legend of the Ascension would +be hard to understand prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. It is +hard to decide.... But it is not difficult to judge on which side the +weightier arguments are</q> (viz., on the part of the contention for an +earlier date). Yet <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> is loath to accept the better scientific reasons: +they must suffer correction by presumptions. He formulates his +final decision in the following way: <q><hi rend='italic'>Luke</hi> wrote at the time of <hi rend='italic'>Titus</hi>, +or during the earlier time of <hi rend='italic'>Domitian</hi> (?), but perhaps (only <emph>perhaps</emph>, +in spite of decisive arguments) already at the beginning of the +sixties.</q> (Recently <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> recedes to the time before the destruction +of Jerusalem without, however, acknowledging a divine prophecy of +this catastrophe.) Similar is this theologian's proof that the fourth +Gospel could not have been written by <hi rend='italic'>John</hi>, the son of <hi rend='italic'>Zebedee</hi>; +because xxi. 20-23 (I will that he tarry till I come) cannot be a +prophecy, but must have been written down after the death of the +favourite disciple. <q>The section xx. 20-23 obviously presupposes the +death of the beloved disciple; on the other hand he cannot be left out +of the 21st Chapter. This 21st Chapter, however, shows no other pen +than that which had written Chapters 1-20. This proves that the +author of Chapter 21, hence the author of Chapters 1-20, could not have +been the son of <hi rend='italic'>Zebedee</hi>, whose death is there presupposed.</q> The whole +argument again rests upon the refusal to hold possible a prophecy from +the lips of Jesus. +</p> + +<p> +The main reason, however, for disputing the genuineness of the +fourth Gospel, although external tradition and internal criterions +testify to it as the writing of <hi rend='italic'>St. John</hi>, is, because it teaches so clearly +the <emph>divinity of Christ</emph>: and this must be denied. Significant are, for +instance, the words in which <hi rend='italic'>Weizsäcker</hi> sums up his objections to +this gospel: <q>That the Apostle, the favorite disciple according to the +Gospel, who sat at the table beside Christ, should have looked upon and +represented everything that he once experienced, as the living together +with the incarnate divine Logos, is rather a puzzle. No power +of faith and no philosophy can be imagined big enough to extinguish +the memory of real life and to replace it by this miraculous image of +a divine being ... of one of the original Apostles, it is unthinkable. +Upon this the decision of this point will always hinge. Anything else +that may be added from the contents of the Gospel is subordinate.</q> +This means, Christ cannot be admitted to be a Divine Being—impossible. +An eye-witness could not take Him for it: therefore, this <q>miraculous +picture of a Divine Being</q> cannot have been the work of an eye-witness. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Like the <emph>genuineness</emph> of the Gospels, so is also their <emph>credibility</emph> +beyond a doubt. Two of them are written by Apostles, +the two others by Disciples of the Apostles: they also have all +the marks peculiar to writings of eye or ear witnesses, or of +persons who have heard the narratives directly from the lips of +<pb n='258'/><anchor id='Pg258'/> +eye-witnesses. Nor would any one doubt their credibility if +they did not report supernatural facts. But, this being the case, +infidel research is bound to arrive at the opposite result. +</p> + +<p> +The writers were frauds—this was long ago the hypothesis +of the superficial Hamburg Professor, <hi rend='italic'>Samuel Reimarus</hi>, whose +<q>Fragments</q> were published by <hi rend='italic'>Lessing</hi>. But even to a <hi rend='italic'>D. F. +Strauss</hi> <q>such a suspicion was repulsive.</q> The Heidelberg Professor, +<hi rend='italic'>H. E. Paulus</hi>, sought his salvation in trying to reduce the +reports of miracles to a natural sense, by doing painful violence +to the text: for instance, the Lord did not walk <emph>upon</emph> the sea, +but only <emph>along</emph> the sea; the miracle of the wine at Cana was +only a wedding joke. Then came <hi rend='italic'>D. F. Strauss</hi> (died 1874), +and he tried it in a different way. <q>If the Gospels are really +historical documents, then the miracle cannot be removed from +the life of Jesus.</q> Hence, it is to remain? Indeed not! The +Gospels must not be accepted as historical sources. They are +products of purposeless poetic legends, the miracles are garlands +of religious myths, gradually twined around the picture +of Jesus. Myths, however, need time for their formation, +hence <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi> fixes the date of the Gospels within +the second century. He openly admits that his hypothesis +would fall to the ground if but a single Gospel has been written +in the first century. As a fact, more recent rationalistic criticism +has found itself constrained to drop this hypothesis. <hi rend='italic'>F. Ch. Baur</hi> +(died 1860) fell back upon the fraud-hypothesis of a <hi rend='italic'>Reimarus</hi>. +It, too, has been laid among the dead. Thus they have exhausted +themselves in the attempt to shake off the burdensome +yoke of truth. +</p> + +<p> +Influenced by <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Baur</hi>, and other German critics, <hi rend='italic'>E. +Renan</hi> (died 1892) wrote his <q>Life of Jesus,</q> a frivolous +romance. Quite frank are the words he wrote down in the +preface to the thirteenth edition of his <q>Vie de Jésus</q> (1883): +<q>If miracle has any reality, then my book is nothing but a +tissue of errors.... If the miracle and the inspiration of certain +books are real things, then our method is abominable.</q> +But he silences all doubts by the phrase: <q>To admit the supernatural +is alone sufficient to place one's self outside of science.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The newer <q>historical-critical</q> school, while having disposed +<pb n='259'/><anchor id='Pg259'/> +of many contentions of the old schools, is nevertheless in its research +bound just as energetically by the postulate of conformity +to natural laws. The fourth Gospel is pushed aside: in the +others all miraculous occurrences are expounded away, till the +<q>historically credible core</q> is reached. +</p> + +<p> +The books of the Old Testament fare even worse, if possible. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Does Genesis relate history or a legend?</q> asks Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Gunkel</hi>, and +continues: <q>this is no longer a question to the historian.</q> Well, a +legend, then. But how does the historian know this? From his own +pantheistic philosophy, which recognizes no God differing from this +world: <q>The narratives of Genesis being mostly of a religious nature, +they continuously speak of God. The way, however, in which narratives +speak of God is one of the most reliable standards to judge +whether they are meant historically or poetically. Here, too, the +historian cannot do without a world philosophy. We believe that +God acts in the world as the latent, hidden motive of all things ... +but He never appears to us as an acting factor <emph>jointly with others</emph> +(the italics are the author's), but always as the ultimate cause of all +things. Quite different in many narratives of Genesis. We are able to +understand these narratives of miracles and apparitions as the artlessness +of primitive people, but we refuse to believe them.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Analogous to Bible-criticism is the research in other branches +of theology. The <emph>origin of Christianity</emph>, this wonderful +power which so suddenly made its appearance in history and +speedily vanquished a whole world, must of course not be a +work of Heaven. Hence its origin must be explained at any +cost in a natural way, or <q>historically,</q> as they put it. The +religious notions of Christianity must not be conceded a supernatural +certainty over all other religions; and <q>to understand +an event historically means: to conceive it by its causal connection +with the conditions of a given place and at a certain +time of the human life. Hence science cannot consider such a +thing as the appearance of a supernatural being upon the +earth</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Pfleiderer</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +And then they proceed to show that Christianity is a natural, +evolutionary product of the Israelite religion, of Greek philosophy, +of Oriental myths, and Roman customs. That it is far +superior to all these, and that it is the opposite to them in +various ways, is carefully hushed up. The inadequacy and impossibility +of such an explanation is adroitly concealed. Nor +<pb n='260'/><anchor id='Pg260'/> +could the Israelite religion of the Old Covenant, according to +the naturalistic principle of liberal theology, have had its +origin in revelation and the prophets; hence it comes from +Babylon, as the product of natural evolution from Oriental myths +and customs. Any old and new analogies, hypotheses, and fancies +are good enough then to demonstrate this as <q>historical.</q> +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Truth is not in Them.</head> + +<p> +We pause here. We might thus continue for a long time; but +it is enough. The patient reader, who has accompanied us on +the tedious way to this point, may begin to feel tired. May +he excuse the detailed recital for the reason that we had to do +some extensive reconnoitring, through the precincts of modern +philosophical-religious research, to avoid the reproach that we +were making accusations without furnishing proofs. Our contention +was, that liberal science is trying to shake off the yoke +of religious truth, and to explain it away by its self-made presumptions. +We believe that we have proved our contention. +</p> + +<p> +We are confronted by a science that boasts of monopolizing the +spirit of truthfulness; as a matter of fact, we see that it uses +all scientific devices to shirk the truth and to disguise its effort. +In loquacious protests it rejects the <q>rigid dogmatism,</q> the +<q>fixed views,</q> of the Christian faith, and it proclaims experience +and reason as the sole criterions of scientific cognition; +yet it always stands upon the platform of rigid presumptions, +that are derived from no experience, and which no reason +can prove. It clamours for research free from presumption, +and, without winking an eye, substitutes its own presumption, +secretly or openly. It is <emph>dishonest</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +It promises to preserve for man the highest ideals and blessings +for which his mind is yearning, yet it has no religion and no God. +It recalls to mind the words spoken by <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> of the philosophers +whom he had followed in the false ways of his youth: +<q>They said: truth, and always truth, and talked much of truth, +but it was not in them.... Oh, truth, truth, how deeply my inmost +spirit sighed after thee, while they filled my ears incessantly +with thy bare name and with the palaver of their bulky volumes.</q> +<pb n='261'/><anchor id='Pg261'/> +Free it wants to be, this science. One of its disciples boasted: +<q>It has taught its disciples to look down without dizziness from +the airy heights of sovereign scepticism. How easy and free one +breathes up there!</q> Aye, it has made itself free,—from the +yoke of unpalatable truth. So much more firmly is it fettered, +not with the holy bonds of belief in God, but by the more burdensome +mental yoke of a disbelief that weakens and blinds the +eyes against the cognition of the higher truth:—and bound by +the chains of public opinion, which threatens anathema to every +one who fails to stop at the border of the natural. Truly free +is only the science that enjoys a clear and free perception for +the truth. Unfree is a science that restrains the mental eye with +the blinkers of theophoby. Our age seeks for the lost happiness +of the soul, it seeks longingly God and the supernatural that have +been removed from its sight. But science, so often its leader, +loathingly dodges God, and refuses to fold the hands and pray. +As long as our age does not break with a science that refuses +to know a God and a Saviour, so long will it hopelessly grope +about without result, and look in vain for an escape from the +wretched labyrinth of doubt. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='262'/><anchor id='Pg262'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter II. The Unscientific Method.</head> + +<p> +The efforts of liberal science, to remove more and more +from its scope the supernatural powers, show clearly that +man may feel the truth to be a yoke, and that he may attempt +to free himself from this yoke by opposing the truth and by +substituting postulates for knowledge. Sceptical, autonomous +subjectivism, the philosophy of liberal free thought, has changed +the nature of human reasoning, and its relation to truth, and +perverted it to its very opposite. No longer is the human mind +the vassal of Queen Truth, as <hi rend='italic'>Plutarch</hi> put it, but the autocratic +ruler who degrades truth to the position of a servant. Thus +liberal freedom of thought becomes the principle of an unscientific +method, because it loses, by false reasoning and false truth, +the first condition of solid and scientific research; furthermore, +by treating the highest questions with consequent levity, it +betrays a lack of earnestness which again renders it unfit for +scientific research in serious matters. +</p> + +<div> +<head>False Reasoning.</head> + +<p> +<q>The philosophical thinkers of to-day,</q> says an admirer of +<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>A. Sabatier</hi>, <q>may be divided into two classes, the pre-Kantian +and those who have received their initiation and their +philosophical baptism from <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> Critic.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The Christian philosophy of a <hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas</hi>, which is, as even +representatives of modern philosophy are constrained to admit, +<q>a system carried out with clear perception and great sagacity</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>), contains many a principle, the intrinsic merit of +which will be fully appreciated only when contrasted with the +experiments of modern philosophy. An instance is the principle +of the old school, that cognition is the likeness of that +<pb n='263'/><anchor id='Pg263'/> +which is cognized. Apart from the cognition by sense, we are +given here the only correct principle, coinciding with the general +conviction that reasoning is the mental reproduction of an +objective order of existence, independent of us, even in our conception +of the metaphysical world. Thinking does not create +its object, but is a reproduction of it; it is not a producer, but +a painter, who copies the world with his mental brush within +himself, sometimes only in the indistinct outlines of indefinite +conception, often, however, in the sharp lines of clear cognition. +</p> + +<p> +If, according to its nature, thinking is subject to standards +and laws given it by an objective world, then subjective arbitrariness, +a method of thought which, while pretending to be a +free producer of truth, yet determines it according to necessity or +desire; and, even more so, a method of thought which feels itself +justified to hold an opinion upon the same question in one way +to-day, and another and entirely opposite one to-morrow, is wholly +incomprehensible: just as incomprehensible as if a draughtsman, +attempting to draw a true picture of St. Peter's Church, +would not follow the reality but prefer to draw the picture at +random, according to his fancy and mood. +</p> + +<p> +We have stated these fundamental principles already at the +beginning of our book, we have also set forth how greatly liberal +freedom of thought is lacking the first presumption of any +proper science, namely, the clear perception that there is an +objective truth in philosophical-religious questions, to which +we must submit, there, in fact, most of all. +</p> + +<p> +No! We also want autonomy of thought, especially in questions +of metaphysics, where, anyway, there can only be postulates! +so shouted <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> to the modern world on the threshold +of the nineteenth century. There are no stable truths, everything +is relative and changing, adds the modern theory of evolution. +At last there is freedom for thought and research, freedom +from the yoke of absolute truth! Behold the aberrations +of an unbridled rush for freedom which moves the world of +to-day. This unruly hankering for a freer existence than +allowed by their nature and position, makes unbearable to many +modern children of man the idea of iron laws of truth and +marked boundaries of thought. Revelling in the consciousness +<pb n='264'/><anchor id='Pg264'/> +of their sovereign personality, they want to measure all things +by their individuality, even religion, philosophy, truth, and +ethics. Only that what is created and experienced by them +within the sanctuary of their personality, only what is made important +and legitimate by their sentiment, is truth and of value +to them. <emph>Autonomism</emph> thus changes unnoticeably into <emph>individualism</emph>; +the own individuality, in its peculiar inclinations, +moods, and humours, its exigencies and egotistical aims, its infirmities +and diseases—they have, under the name of <emph>individual +reason</emph>, become the law of thinking and reasoning. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Without Knowledge of the Human Nature.</head> + +<p> +<q>Varied, according to character, are the demands made by +heart and mind,</q> assures us a representative of modern philosophy, +<q>corresponding to them is the image of the world to which +the individual turns by inner necessity. He may waver hither +and thither, uncertain as to himself; at last, however, his innermost +tendency of life will prevail and press him into the view +of the world corresponding to his individuality. Upon its +further development worldly and local influences will play a +very important part. But the deciding factor in giving the +direction is personality.</q> <q>And,</q> continues Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Adickes</hi>, <q>the +sharper and more one-sided a character type is brought to expression, +the more it will be urged into a certain metaphysical +or religious tendency, and this man will find no rest, nor feel +himself at home in the world, until he has found the view of life +that fits him. Nor does man assemble his metaphysics with discrimination +on the grounds of logical necessity, choosing here, +rejecting there, but it grows within himself by that inner compulsion +identical with true freedom.</q> Hence, not unselfish +yielding to truth, no, the inclinations of heart and mind, the +<q>personality</q> must form the view of the world. Let every +type of character therefore develop itself sharply and one-sidedly, +let every one get the view of the world corresponding +to himself, without regard to objective truth and logical necessity. +This precisely is the <q>true freedom.</q> <q>For when is a +man more free, than when he chooses and does—without any +<pb n='265'/><anchor id='Pg265'/> +compulsion, even resisting compulsion—what his innermost +soul is urging him to choose and do? How could he be more +true to himself, more like himself?</q> With such a freedom +<q>the outer compulsion</q> of an absolute truth, to say nothing of +the duty to believe, will not agree. <q>The core of one's very +being,</q> so <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> informs us, <q>should be grasped in its depths, +and the soul should only know its own needs and the way indicated +by it to gratify them.</q> <q>According to my character,</q> +says <hi rend='italic'>Adickes</hi> again, <q>is the world reflected within myself by +intrinsic necessity just as my creed represents it, and no opponent +is able to shake my position by arguments of reason or +by empirical facts.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Hence it is not only true, as has been known from the beginning, +that the inclinations of the heart are trying to prevail +upon reason to urge their desires, and to oppose what displeases +them, and that reason must beware of the heart—no, inclination +and character are now directly called upon to shape our +religion and view of the world. Every type of man, every period, +may construct its own philosophical system, or, if this is beyond +it, at least its own ideas; it may also shape its own +Christianity, according to its experience. As the individual +chooses his clothes, and puts his individuality into them, in like +manner may the individual put on the view of life that fits him. +</p> + +<p> +These principles represent the apostasy from objective truth, +and, at the same time, the apostasy from the <emph>principles of true +science</emph>: their first demand, the proper understanding of truth, +is perverted into its very opposite. A necessary quality of scientific +research is exactness; exactness, however, demands most +conscientious cleaving to truth; scale and measure are its instruments. +The reverse of exactness is to cast away scale and +measure, to turn eye and ear, not toward reality, but toward +one's self, so as to observe personal wishes and inclinations, and +then shape the results of the <q>research</q> accordingly. This may +be a method of freedom, but it cannot be the method of science. +The very thing that true research would eliminate in the first +place, viz., to have the decision influenced by hobbies and moods, +is most important in the method of individualism; objectiveness, +deemed by true science the highest requirement, is to that method +<pb n='266'/><anchor id='Pg266'/> +the least one: what true science first of all insists on, namely, +to prove that which is claimed, this method knows but little of. +It recalls the method of the gourmet who selects that which +gratifies his taste: it may be likened to the dandy picking frock-coat +and trousers that suit his whim. True research, with a +firm hand at the helm, aims to direct its craft so as to discover +new coasts, or at least a new island; the exploring done by +liberal research is like casting off the rudder to be tossed by +the waves, for its task is only to hold to the course which the +waving billows of individual life give to it. True science, +finally, seeks for serious results, able to withstand criticism: the +research by individualism produces results which, as individualism +itself confesses, must not be taken seriously. They are +the subjective achievements of amateurs, creations of fashion, +cut to the pattern of the ruling principle: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>nihil nisi quod +modernum est</foreign>. A science that professes such a method is beyond +a doubt unfit to play a beneficial part in the endeavour +of mankind. +</p> + +<p> +Do not say: but it is not claimed that religion and view of life +are matters of scientific research: on the contrary, they are +always distinguished from science. It is true, this is not infrequently +claimed. But it is also known how energetically just +these matters are appropriated by science. Is it not exactly +this sphere in which free research is to be active? Is it not +its aim to construct a <q>scientific view of the world,</q> as opposed +to the Christian belief? Is there not the conviction that +science has already carried much light and enlightenment into +this very sphere, that it has upset the old tenets of faith? +</p> + +<p> +And what an amount of <emph>ignorance of human nature</emph> underlies +these principles! It is the same complete misconception +that has always characterized liberalism, and which it has also +manifested in economical matters. There, too, it demanded +boundless freedom for all economic sources, ignoring man's disordered +inclinations that will work disorder and destruction if +not restrained by laws. In a similar manner they dream that +man, if left to the unrestrained influence of his personality, will +soar without fail to the heights of the pure truth. They know no +longer the maxim once engraved by the wisdom of the ancient +<pb n='267'/><anchor id='Pg267'/> +world upon Delphi's sanctuary: <q>Know thyself</q>! They no +longer know the beguiling and benumbing influence exerted +upon reason by inclination, how it fetters the mind. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Amor +premit oculos</foreign>, says Quintilian. The thing we like, we desire to +establish as true; favourable arguments are decisive, counter +arguments are ignored or belittled, inclinations guide the observation, +determine the books and sources drawn from. If we meet +with something unsympathetic, something that interferes with +the liberties we have grown fond of, it takes a rare degree of unselfishness +to love the painful truth more than one's self. It is +easy to leave cool reason in control in mathematical speculations: +they seldom affect the heart; quite different, however, in +questions of philosophy and religion that often have vexatious +consequences. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +We have to concede that <hi rend='italic'>D. F. Strauss</hi> was right when he wrote: +<q>He who writes about the Rulers of Nineveh or the Pharaohs of Egypt, +may pursue a purely historical interest: but Christianity is a power +so alive, and the question of what occurred at its origin is involved +in such vast consequences for the immediate present, that the inquirer +would have to be dull-witted to be interested only in a purely historical +way in the solution of these questions.</q> But we must also regret +that this personal interest has misled him, for one, into pernicious ways. +</p> + +<p> +In view of the frequent assurances of the noted historian, <hi rend='italic'>Th. +Mommsen</hi>, that he hates the sight of old Christian inscriptions<note place='foot'>Compare Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum XI (1883, vii.).</note> +we may perhaps welcome it in the interest of history that he refrained +from writing the fourth volume of his Roman history, wherein the +Origin of Christianity was to be treated. One of his biographers asserts +that the downfall of paganism through Christianity was a fact not to +<hi rend='italic'>Mommsen's</hi> liking, that <q>a description of the decomposition of all +things ancient, and the substitution therefor of the Nazarene spirit +would not have been a labour of love.</q><note place='foot'><hi rend='italic'>L. M. Hartmann</hi>, Theodor Mommsen (1908), 81. The author of +the biography is a Jew. There is a much-circulated story, alleged to +come from <hi rend='italic'>F. X. Kraus</hi>. <hi rend='italic'>Mommsen</hi> is said to have told <hi rend='italic'>Kraus</hi>, inasmuch +as neither the origin, nor nature, nor the spread of Christianity can +be explained by natural causes, and since he, in his capacity of historian, +could never acknowledge anything supernatural, therefore the +fourth volume will remain unwritten.</note> And again, when we see the +well-known historian of philosophy, <hi rend='italic'>F. Ueberweg</hi>, in a letter to <hi rend='italic'>F. A. +Lange</hi>, denouncing from the bitterness of his heart <q>the miserable beggar-principle +of Christianity,</q> and the <q>surrendering of independence +and of personal honour in favour of a servile submission to the master, +<pb n='268'/><anchor id='Pg268'/> +who is made a Messiah, nay, even the incarnate <emph>Son of God</emph>,</q> then we +may well dread the historical objectivity of a man of such notions in +writing about the religion of Jesus Christ. +</p> + +<p> +With reference to the chief subject of psychology, the noted psychologist, +<hi rend='italic'>W. James</hi>, writes with utmost frankness: <q>The soul is an +entity, and truly one of the worst kind, a scholastic one, and something +said to be destined for salvation or perdition. As far as I am concerned, +I must frankly admit that the antipathy against the particular +soul I find myself burdened with, is an old hardness of heart, which I +cannot account for, not even to myself. I will admit that the formal +disposition of the question in dispute would come to an end, if the existence +of souls could be used for an explanatory principle. I admit +the soul would be a means of unification, whereas the working of the +brain, or ideas, show no harmonizing efficacy, no matter how thoroughly +synchronical they be. Yet, despite these admissions, I never resort in +my psychologizing to the soul.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +If we read such statement, if, in addition, we remember the +popular-philosophical science of men like <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, particularly +perhaps the literature which he recommends for information +about Christianity, and of which he himself makes use; if we have +read <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>, or the <q>Philosophy of Races</q> +of a <hi rend='italic'>Chamberlain</hi>,—we can no longer be at a loss what to think +of the <q>rule of reason</q> and of the <q>search for pure truth.</q> +Observe, also, the restless haste of those who, having turned +their back upon the Catholic Church, now proceed to attack her, +observe their agitated work and incitement, how they rummage +and ransack the nooks and corners of the history of the Church +in quest of refuse and filth, and if the find is not sufficient how +they even help it along by forgery, all this to demonstrate to the +world that the grandest fact in history is really absurdity and +filth;—then one will understand what instincts may be found +there to guide <q>reason and science.</q> How even sexual impulses +are trying to shape their own ethics we shall not examine +here. <hi rend='italic'>F. W. Foerster</hi> relates: <q>I once heard a moral pervert +expound his ethical and religious notions; they were nothing +but the reflection of his perverse impulses. But he thought +them to be the result of his reasoning.</q> Is there not known +in these days the inherited disorder of the human heart as +characterized by the Apostle in the words: <q>But I see another +law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind, and +captivating me in the law of sin (Rom. vii. 23)</q>? The Ancients +<pb n='269'/><anchor id='Pg269'/> +knew it. The wisdom of <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> knew it, who speaks of the +<q>pricks of sin, sunk into man, coming from an old, unexpiated +offence, giving birth to wickedness.</q> The wise <hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi> knew of it: +<q>Nature has bestowed upon us but a few sparks of knowledge, +which, corrupted by bad habits and errors, we soon extinguish, +with the result that the light of nature does nowhere appear +in its clearness and brightness.</q> Truth is often disagreeable to +nature. And if not subdued and ruled by strong discipline, +nature proceeds to oppose the truth. Only to lofty self-discipline +and purity of morals is reserved the privilege of facing the +highest truths with a calm eye. <q>Blessed are the pure in heart, +for they shall see God.</q> +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Mental Bondage.</head> + +<p> +Of this wisdom the admirer of liberal freedom knows little. +Instead of distinguishing the good from the evil in man, of +unfolding his inner kernel, the pure spirit, and making it rule; +instead of demanding, like <hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, discipline as a preparatory +school for wisdom, he has learned from <hi rend='italic'>Rousseau</hi>, the +master of modern Liberalism, that everything in man is good. +Depravity of nature, original sin, are unsympathetic things to +his ear. Even <hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi> wrote to <hi rend='italic'>Herder</hi>, when <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> had in his +religious philosophy found a radical Evil in man: <q>After it +has taken <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> a lifetime to clean his philosophical gown of +many filthy prejudices, he now outrageously slabbers it with +the stain of the radical Evil, so that Christians, too, may be +enticed to come and kiss the seam.</q> Instead of exhorting for +a redemption from internal fetters, as the sages of all ages +did, the principle of wisdom now proposed is to quietly let +individuality develop, with all its inclinations. They call this +freedom. Is it not the freedom whereof the slave of sensuality +avails himself to form his theory of life? It, too, <q>grows up in +man with that inner compulsion which is identical with true +freedom</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Adickes</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Freedom this may be. But <emph>only external freedom</emph>, the only +freedom they often know. They are unaware that they forfeit +thereby the real, the inner freedom. <q>Thou aimest at free +heights,</q> admonishes even the most impetuous herald of freedom, +<pb n='270'/><anchor id='Pg270'/> +<q>thy soul is athirst for stars. But also thy wicked impulses +are athirst for freedom. Thy wild hounds want to be +free, they bark joyfully in their kennel when thy spirit essays +to throw open all dungeons.</q><note place='foot'><hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>, <q>Thus spoke Zarathustra.</q></note> They think to be free and speak +of the self-assurance of individual reason, and they cannot see +that the mind is in the fetters of bondage. +</p> + +<p> +Else how is it that the atheistic free science, considered in +general, arrives with infallible regularity at results that obviously +tend to a morally loose conduct of life? How is it, that +it tries throughout to shirk the acceptance of a personal God, +and is at home only in open or disguised atheism? that it so +persistently avoids the acceptance of anything supernatural? +Why does it in its researches never arrive at theism, which has +as much foundation at least as pantheism and atheism? Why +does it, nearly without exception, deny or ignore the personal immortality +of the soul and a Beyond; why does it never reach +the opposite result which, in intrinsic evidence, ranks at least +on a par with it? Why is it not admitted, that the will is free +and strictly responsible for its acts, although this fact is borne +out by the obvious experience and testimony of mankind? Why +does it so regularly arrive at the conclusion that the Christian +religion has become untenable, and needs development; that its +ethics, too, must be reformed, more especially in sexual matters? +Why does it not defend the duty to believe, but reject it persistently? +A striking fact! The matters in question here concern +truths that impose sacrifices upon man, whereas their +opposites have connections of intimate friendship with unpurged +impulses. It may be noted also that this same science, +that announces to the world these results of research, meets with +the boisterous applause from the elements that belong to the +morally inferior part of mankind. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> prays: <q>Redeem me, O God, from the throng of +thoughts, which I feel so painfully within my soul, which feels lowly +in Thy presence, which is fleeing to Thy mercy. Grant me that I +may not give my assent to them; that I may disapprove of them, even +if they seek to delight me, and that I may not stay with them in +sleepiness. May they not have the power to insinuate themselves into +<pb n='271'/><anchor id='Pg271'/> +my works; may I be protected from them in my resolution, may my +conscience be protected by Thy keeping.</q> It is the realization of the +want of freedom of the human reason, the only way to the liberation +from the fetters of our own imperfection. He, who has seriously begun +to take up the struggle with his inner disorders, will, by his own experience, +pray as <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> prayed. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Recognizing this fact, man will try to rise above himself, to +cleave to a superior Power and Wisdom, who, in purer heights, +untouched by human passions, holds aloft the truth, in order to +rise thereby above his own bondage; he will understand the +necessity of an authority clothed with divine power and dignity, +so that it may hold in unvanquished hands the ideal against +all onslaughts of human passions. He will without difficulty +find this power in the religion of Jesus Christ and in His +Church: in Him, who could not be accused of sin, who by +His Cross has achieved the highest triumph over flesh and sin, +who has surrounded His Church with the bright throng of +saints. And if he sees this religion and Church an object of +persecution, he will behold in it the signature of its truth. For +truth is a yoke despised by sensualism and pride, and the spiritual +power that contends for purity and truth will be hated. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Without Earnestness.</head> + +<p> +The regrettable conception of truth proper to the modern +freedom of thought, leads to that flippancy with which our +time is prone to treat the highest questions. Why conscientiousness +and anxious care? All that is needed is to form one's +personal views; there is no certain, generally valid, truth in +religious matters. Hence there is often in this sphere of scientific +research a method wholly different from that in use anywhere +else. In history, philology, natural science, there is a +striving for exactness, but in these matters exact reasoning is +replaced only too often by discretionary reasoning, by loose +forming of ideas; in the very domain which has ever pre-eminently +been called the province of the wisdom of life, there +is now in vogue the method of flippancy. +</p> + +<p> +True wisdom is convinced that reason has not been given +<pb n='272'/><anchor id='Pg272'/> +to man to grope in the dark in respect to the most momentous +questions of life; that reason, though limited and liable to err, +is given him to find the truth. True wisdom knows its difficulties +when the matter in quest is metaphysical truth: it knows +how, in this case, more than in any other, reason is exposed +to the influence of inclinations from within, and to the power +of error and of public opinion from without; that in these +matters, least of all, reason is not in the habit of taking the +truth by assault. True, there are intuitions, and inspiration by +genius—they have their rights, but they are the exceptions. +The ordinary, and only safe, way is to advance cautiously, by +discoursive thinking, from cognition to cognition, otherwise +there is danger of a sudden fall from the steep path. +</p> + +<p> +In the early Christian ages this insight led to careful cultivation +and application of certain methodical means of thinking +and terms of expressions, to definitions, distinctions, and forms +of syllogism, with that <q>insulting lucidity,</q> in the words of +a modern philosopher, which gives to them the stamp of scrupulousness. +The same insight into the cognitive weakness of +reason leads to the noble union between science and modesty. +</p> + +<p> +What, however, do we see in modern philosophic-religious +thinking? Often unsolidity, with hardly a remnant of the +principles of the serious pursuit of knowledge. +</p> + +<p> +The autonomous freethinker of these days lacks chiefly humility +and modesty. The ancient Sage of Samos once declined +the name of <q>sage,</q> saying that God alone is wise, while man +must be content to be wisdom-loving (φιλόσοφος). Not always +so the sages of modern times. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> believed of his system: <q>Critical philosophy must be convinced +that there is not in store for it a change of opinions, no +improvement nor possibly a differently formed system, but that the system +of criticism, resting on a fully assured basis, will be established +forever, indispensable for all coming ages to the highest aims of mankind.</q> +<hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi>, in turn, was no less convinced of the indispensability of +his doctrine. In the summer term of 1820 he began his lectures with +the words: <q>I would say with Christ: I teach the truth, and I am +the truth.</q> Yet, to <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi> <hi rend='italic'>Hegel's</hi> philosophy is nonsense, humbug, +and worse. <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi> knew better, and was convinced that +he had lifted the veil of truth higher than any mortal before him; +he claimed that he had written paragraphs <q>which may be taken to +<pb n='273'/><anchor id='Pg273'/> +have been inspired by the Holy Ghost.</q> Shortly before his death he +wrote: <q>My curse upon any one, who in reprinting my works shall +knowingly make a change; be it but a sentence, or a word, a syllable +or a punctuation point.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> held: <q>I have given to the world +the most profound book in its possession.</q> To the eyes of this philosophy, +modesty and humility are no longer virtues. <hi rend='italic'>B. Spinoza</hi>, a leader +in later philosophy, states expressly: <q>Humility is no virtue; it does +not spring from reason. It is a sadness, springing from the fact that +man becomes aware of his impotence.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +An arrogant mind is not capable of finding the higher truth +with certainty; conscientious obedience to truth, unselfish abstention +from asserting one's ego, and one's pet opinion, can +dwell only in the humble mind. Here applies what <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> +said of the Neoplatonists: <q>To acquiesce in truth you +need humility, which, however, is very difficult to instil into +your minds.</q><note place='foot'><q><foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Veritati ut possetis acquiescere, humilitate opus erat, quae civitati, +vestrae difficillime persuaderi potest</foreign></q> (De civit. Dei, X, 29).</note> +</p> + +<p> +When God's authority steps before scientists and earnestly demands +faith, they will talk excitedly about their human dignity +that does not permit them to believe; about reason being +their court of last resort that must not know of submission; +and if the Church, in the name of God, steps before them, they +become abusive. +</p> + +<p> +Men who have scarcely outgrown their minority often feel it +incumbent upon themselves to furnish humanity with new +thought and to discard the old. <hi rend='italic'>D. F. Strauss</hi>, a young under-master +of twenty-seven years, writes his <q>Life of Jesus, critically +analyzed</q> (1835); he tells the Christian world that everything +it has hitherto held sacred is a delusion and a snare; he +feels the vocation to <q>replace the old, obsolete, supernatural, +method of contemplating the history of Jesus with a new one,</q> +which changes all divine deeds into myths. Hardly out of +knickerbockers and kilts, they feel experienced enough to come +forth with novel and unheard-of propositions on the highest +problems. In business and office, as in public service, sober-mindedness +and maturity are demanded; but to work out the ultimate +questions of humanity, inexperience and lack of the deeper +knowledge of life do not disqualify in our time. If <hi rend='italic'>Schiller's</hi> +<pb n='274'/><anchor id='Pg274'/> +complaint of the Kantians of his time was that, <q>What they +have scarcely learned to-day, they want to teach to-morrow,</q> what +is to be said of those who teach even before they have learned? +And what superficial thinking do we meet in the philosophy of +the day! Lacking all solid training, they proceed to construct +new systems, or at least fragments of them. As regards their +competence, one is often tempted to quote the harsh words of +a modern writer: <q>I believe <hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi> would have formed +a better opinion of the human intellect, had he paid less attention +to authors and newspaper-writers, and more to the common +sense evinced by men in their work and business</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +It would be highly instructive to take a longer journey +through the realm of modern philosophy, in so far as it touches +upon questions concerning the theory of the world, or even +liberal Protestant theology, so as to subject to a searching criticism +the untenable notions and attempts at demonstration +even of acknowledged representatives of this science, whereby +they generally do away with God and miracles, the soul and immortality, +freedom of the will, the divine moral laws, the +Gospel, the divinity of Christ, and so much more, and show +what they offer in place of all this. It would disclose an enormous +lack of scientific method: instead of assured results they +offer questionable, even untenable theories; in place of proofs, +emphatical assertions, imperatives, catch phrases; or else arguments +which under the simplest test will prove miscarriages of +logic. These philosophers vault ditches and boundaries with +ease, and derive full gratification from imperfect and warped +ideas. Of course, exactness in philosophical thinking is not a +fruit to be plucked while out taking a walk; it is the product +of serious mental work, of sterling philosophical training, +which, alas, is wanting to-day in large circles of scientists. +</p> + +<p> +As an instance, we point to the method described in a previous +chapter, by which all supernatural factors are rejected by +the arbitrary postulate of <q>exclusively natural causation,</q> without +valid proofs, based only upon the arbitrary decision of so-called +modern science—in the gravest matter an unscientific +process that cannot be outdone. +</p> + +<pb n='275'/><anchor id='Pg275'/> + +<p> +Another instructive instance, of serious matters treated with +levity, is furnished in the unscrupulous way in which the Catholic +Church, her teaching, institutions, and history, are passed +upon in judgment by those having neither knowledge nor +fairness. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Without Reverence.</head> + +<p> +True wisdom accepts advice and guidance. It feels reverence +for sacred and venerable traditions, for the convictions of mankind +on the great questions of life, and greater reverence still +for an authority of faith that has received from God its warrant +to be the teacher of mankind, and which has stood the test of +time. True wisdom is convinced that continuity in human +thinking and in knowledge is necessary. Life is short, and +gives to the individual hardly time to attain mental maturity. +Philosophy, and this is the matter before us at present,—philosophy +can never be the work of a single person; it is the +achievement of centuries; succeeding generations, with searching +eye and careful hand, building further upon the achievement for +which past ages have laid the foundations. By nailing together +beams and boards the individual may erect a house good enough +for a short time to serve his sports and pleasures; and if wrecked +by the first storm, it may be replaced by another. But the building +of massive and towering cathedrals that last for ages required +the work of generations. And only skilful and experienced +hands may do the work; haste is out of place here. The ancient +sages of Greece, <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, had this +reverence for the philosophical and religious traditions of the +past. These representatives of true wisdom did not consider +philosophy and theology as the product of individual sagacity, +they did not attempt to be free rulers in the realm of thought; +on the contrary, they looked upon wisdom as the patrimony of +the past, which it was their duty to preserve. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +They pointed to their venerable traditions, however meagre they +were. <q>Our forefathers,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, <q>who were better than we are, +and stood nearer to the gods than we, have handed down to us this +revelation.</q><note place='foot'><hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, Phil. 6 c. Similarly <hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi>.</note> That the testimony of the great sages, to the effect +<pb n='276'/><anchor id='Pg276'/> +that the most essential elements of their philosophy had their origin +in religious traditions, is based upon truth and not on fancy has been +proven by <hi rend='italic'>O. Willmann</hi>, whose knowledge of ancient civilization was +very extensive, in his monumental <q>History of Idealism.</q> Delhi, the +home of mysteries, the generations of priests in ancient Egypt, the doctrinal +traditions of the Chaldeans, the Magi of Medes and Persians, and +the wisdom of the Brahmins of ancient India are witnesses to the fact. +<q>The Ancients were correct,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Willmann</hi>, <q>in tracing their philosophy +to earliest traditions ... they knew what they owed to their forefathers +better than we do. They direct our astonished eyes to a very +ancient reality, to a towering remoteness of living thought.</q> This fact +is very much against the taste of our times.... An inherited wisdom, +springing from an original revelation, adapted to the nations, shining +with renewed brightness in true philosophy, is quite the opposite to a +philosophy that seeks the source of mental life only in isolated thinking; +that thinks its success to be conditioned upon unprepossession; +that holds the refutation of tradition to be the test of its strength. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Unfortunately this latter view is widespread in our time. +Research is often directed, not by reverence for the wisdom +inherited from many Christian centuries, but by the mania, +unwise and fatal alike, of seeking new paths. <q>Love of truth,</q> +so we are told, <q>is what urges on the great leaders of humanity, +the prophets and reformers, to seek new and untrodden paths +of life. <q>Plus ultra</q> is the rallying-cry of these pathfinders +of the future, who are clearing the way for the mental life of +mankind. No authority can restrain them, no prejudice, however +holy: they are following the light which has dawned upon +their soul</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +And a multitude discover this light in their souls, and join +the prophets and pathfinders! Everybody goes abroad looking +for untrodden paths; from all directions comes the cry: +Here and there, to the right, to the left, is the right way! Do we +not only too often see self-willed and self-satisfied thinkers, +whose shortsighted conceit gets within the four walls of their +study puffed up against God and religion, offer us for holy +truth the fanciful products of their narrow brains? Do we +not see, only too often, champions of shallow reasoning, without +discipline of thought and without ethical maturity, recommending +their undigested efforts as the wisdom of the world? +Youthful thinkers there are in numbers, each of whom claims +that he at last has succeeded in solving the world riddle; they +<pb n='277'/><anchor id='Pg277'/> +offer us new theories of the world, new ideas on ethics, on +law and theology, for a few dollars per copy or less. The holy +abode of truth has become the campus for saunterers, each +eager to displace the other so that he may be sole proprietor, +or at least a respected partner. Day by day new solutions +of <q>problems,</q> <q>vital questions,</q> or at least <q>outlines</q> of +them; new <q>views of the world</q>; new forms of religion and of +Christianity for the <q>modern man</q>; <q>reforms</q> of marriage +and of sexual ethics, and so on. Truth had not been discovered +until the newcomer puts his pen to the paper. Every one +is free to join in. Yea, more, he may not only join in, but +lash those who do not applaud him. According to this notion, +nothing has a right to exist, no <q>sacred prejudice</q> may be +claimed once this self-appointed representative of science takes +the field for <q>research.</q> Behold the Christian truth, it has +stood the test of centuries: but it cannot resist these scientific +freebooters, they rush over it with banners flying. +</p> + +<p> +Severe speech would here be in order. A painful spectacle, +these doings of modern thought in the sacred precincts of truth. +<q>Put off the shoes from thy feet; for the place whereon thou +standest is holy ground,</q> we imagine to hear; yet this sanctuary +of truth has been made a profane place of bartering. +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +While still a pagan, but moved by his desire for truth, the +philosopher <hi rend='italic'>Justin</hi> went to the schools of his day to seek the +solution of his doubts and queries. First he turned to a Stoic, +but as he taught nothing of God, <hi rend='italic'>Justin</hi> was unsatisfied. He +next went to a Peripatetic teacher, then to a Pythagorean, +but failed to find what he desired. The Platonist at last gave +him something. Walking alone along the beach, and musing over +<hi rend='italic'>Plato's</hi> principles, he met an old man who referred him to the +truth of Christianity, to the Prophets and the Apostles: <q>They +alone have seen the truth and proclaimed it unto man, they +were afraid of no one, knew no fear; yielded to no opinion; +filled with the Holy Ghost, they spoke only what they saw and +heard. The Scriptures are still extant, and he who takes them +up will find in them a treasure of information about principles +and ultimate things, and all else the philosopher must know, +<pb n='278'/><anchor id='Pg278'/> +if he believes them.</q><note place='foot'>Dial. c. Tryph. 2.</note> And <hi rend='italic'>Justin</hi> found truth and peace, and +bowed to the yoke of the doctrine of Jesus Christ. +</p> + +<p> +What a striking contrast between this serious love of truth +in the days of passing heathendom, and the uncontrolled thinking +of so many in our Christian age! To them truth is no +longer a sacred treasure, a yoke to be assumed in reverence; +it has become the plaything of their impressions and inclinations. +Indeed, they consider it a burden to accept the old +Christian truth, with which they meet on all their ways. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='279'/><anchor id='Pg279'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter III. The Bitter Fruit.</head> + +<div> +<head>The Vocation of Science.</head> + +<p> +Science is, and ever was, an influential factor operating +upon the thought, aims, and actions of man. Hence science +must remain conscious of its vocation. First of all it +is to hold aloft and preserve the <emph>spiritual possessions of +mankind</emph>. True, science must also progress; but progress +means growth, which presupposes the preservation of what has +been received from of old. This applies pre-eminently to the +philosophical-religious patrimony of the past; no error could +be more fatal than to presume that each generation must start +from the beginning, that the foundations, which have safely supported +human life for centuries, must be obsolete because human +nature is suddenly considered changed. +</p> + +<p> +What are these foundations? They are the tested religious +and moral convictions of mankind, and, for our nations particularly, +the divine tenets of Christianity, that have been their +highest ideals for centuries, and have produced serenity and a +high standard of morality. If science aims to be the principle of +conservation and not of destruction, it must look upon the safeguarding +of those possessions of the nations as its sacred task. +Indeed, it would perform this task but poorly were it to waste +this patrimony piece by piece, or to shatter it with wicked fist, +instead of respecting and honouring it, or to set fire to the +sanctuary where mankind hitherto has dwelled in peace and +happiness. A science of this kind would not only cease to be a +bulwark for the mental life of mankind, but turn into a positive +danger. +</p> + +<p> +In as far as it follows the principles of liberal freedom of +research, present-day science does present this danger. This cannot +<pb n='280'/><anchor id='Pg280'/> +be denied, the facts speak too plainly. By its very nature +it <emph>must</emph> become such danger. For it recognizes no belief, +neither in God nor in the Church; no dogmas, no <q>prejudices,</q> +no traditions, however sacred, are to be respected; it is fundamental +unbelief, the principle of opposition to the Christian +religion. Its autonomous Subject emancipates himself from +the yoke of objective truth which he cannot procreate free out of +himself. It confesses the principle that there are neither truths +nor values that endure; <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>plus ultra!</foreign> always new ideas! <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Quieta +movere</foreign>, hitherto the watchword of unwisdom, is this science's +maxim. And liberal freedom of research is what its nature +compels it to be. Can it do any more than it has done, +to prove itself a principle of mental pauperism? We shall not +demand a list of the things it has thrown aside and shattered. +Let us rather ask, <emph>what it has left whole</emph> of the sacred institutions +of truth, inherited from a Christian past. Alas, it has +cast off and denied everything; it has lost not only the things +a Christian age has treasured, but even those a higher paganism +had revered. Let us examine this sad work of negation and +annihilation. It is a more melancholy spectacle than any war +of extermination that was ever waged against Europe's Christian +civilization by a people bent on trampling down every flower +of Christian culture, and on razing every castle to the ground. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Are We Still Christians?</head> + +<p> +This was the question proposed some scores of years ago by +<hi rend='italic'>D. Strauss</hi> to himself, and to those of his mind. With this +question we will begin. To our forefathers, especially of the +German nation, nothing was more sacred than the Christian +religion; no people like the German has absorbed it so fully, +has been so permeated with it. But now, wherever liberal science—here +especially modern Protestant theology that brings +liberal freedom of research into full application—wherever it +has made the Christian religion a subject of its study, one treasure +after another has been lost; of the whole of Christendom +nothing remains but an empty name and a formal homage, +reminding of the courtesy paid to deposed rulers. +</p> + +<pb n='281'/><anchor id='Pg281'/> + +<p> +In the first place, there has been dropped the fundamental thesis +of the <emph>divinity of Christ</emph>, whereupon rests the entire structure +of Christianity. Man's modern emancipation from everything +supernatural has been accomplished also with respect to +the person of Christ: the man Christ is divested of His divinity +and of everything miraculous; His birth by the virgin, His miracles +and prophecies, His resurrection and ascension, once the +subjects of exalting feasts, have fallen a victim to unbelieving +science. It is true, they exert themselves to keep His person +in view, they want the purely human Jesus to hold His old +position of God and man in the believing consciousness, to conceal +the mental pauperization. But this trick is failing more and +more. The Son of God sees Himself gradually placed among the +great men of history; we are becoming accustomed to find in +the <q>Biographies of Celebrated Men,</q> among <q>Religious Educators,</q> +side by side with <hi rend='italic'>Confucius</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Buddha</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Augustine</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Mohammed</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Luther</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi>, also the name of Jesus. +The lustre of the past belief in His divinity is paling. In the +eyes of unbelieving science He has ceased to be the infallible, +all-surpassing Authority, and the basis of the faith. The teaching +of Jesus has become the subject of an analyzing and eliminating +criticism, and whenever deemed advisable His authority +is simply ignored; He was human, affected by the views and +errors of His age. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Thus they know, as does <hi rend='italic'>H. Gunkel</hi>, that <q>Jesus and the Apostles +evidently have taken those narratives (the miracles of Genesis) to be +reality and not poetry</q>; <q>the men of the New Testament on such questions +take no particular attitude but share the (erroneous) opinions +of their times.</q> They also know <q>that in regard to persons possessed +with demons Jesus shared the erroneous notions of his time</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Braun</hi>), +and <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Delitzsch</hi> informs us that it was <q>particularly a Babylonian +superstition,</q> in consequence of which <q>the belief in demons and devils +assumed such importance in the imagination of Jesus of Nazareth and +of his Galilean disciples.</q> Thus the word is fulfilled literally: <q>He is +a sign which will be contradicted.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +No one knows really <emph>who Jesus was</emph>. His person is the football +of opinions. <q>If any one desiring reliable information, as +to who Jesus Christ was, and what message He brought, should +consult the literature of the day, he would find buzzing round +<pb n='282'/><anchor id='Pg282'/> +him contradictory voices.... Taken all in all, the impression +made by these contradicting opinions is depressing: the confusion +seems past hope,</q> admits Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Also <hi rend='italic'>E. V. Hartmann</hi> remarks: <q>Thus, according to some, Jesus +was a poet, to others a mystic visionary, a third sees in him the militant +hero for freedom and human dignity, to a fourth he was the +organizer of a new Church and of an ecclesiastical system of ethics, to a +fifth the rationalistic reformer ... to the eleventh a naturalistic pantheist +like <hi rend='italic'>Giordano Bruno</hi>, to the twelfth a superman on the order of +<hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche's</hi> Zarathustra....</q> A chaos of opinions agreeing only in the +one aim of rejecting His divinity. <hi rend='italic'>A. Schweitzer</hi>, himself a representative +of liberal Protestant research, says, <q>Nothing is more negative +than the result of the research concerning the life of Jesus.</q> And knowing +Jesus's person no longer, they no longer know anything certain +about His teaching, as is clear from the above. According to <hi rend='italic'>I. Wellhausen</hi>, +from the <q>unsufficient fragments at hand we can get but a +scanty conception of the doctrine of Jesus.</q>—The fathers were rich, +the children have grown poor. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Dissipaverunt substantiam suam!</foreign> +</p> + +<p> +To many even the <emph>existence of Jesus</emph> has become doubtful; and this +not only to men of an irreligious propaganda, like Prof. <hi rend='italic'>A. Drews</hi>, who, +carried away by the corroding tendency of a radical age, journeyed +from town to town in order to proclaim, in the twentieth century of +Christian reckoning, the scientific discovery of the <q>Myth of Christ</q>; +but even to others the existence of Jesus has become doubtful or at +least valueless. The task now is to do away entirely with the person of +Jesus, and to solve the problem of preserving a Christian faith without +a Christ. In this sense Prof. <hi rend='italic'>M. Rade</hi> writes: <q>Serious and gifted +men having asserted that Jesus never existed (or, what amounts to +the same, that, if He ever lived, nothing is known of Him; hence, +His existence is of no historical importance), we dogmatists almost +have to be grateful to them for having helped us to put a very concrete +question no longer in general terms: how does religious certainty face +historical criticism? but quite specifically: how does religious certainty +(of the Christian) regard the historic-scientific possibility of the +non-existence of the historical Jesus?</q> They frankly assert that they +could entirely forego the person of Christ. Thus Prof. <hi rend='italic'>P. W. Schmiedel</hi> +declares: <q>My innermost religious conviction would not suffer injury +were I to be convinced to-day that Jesus never lived.... I would +know that I could not lose the measure of piety that has become my +property long since, even if I cannot derive it any longer from +Jesus.</q> <q>Neither does my piety require me to see in Jesus an absolutely +perfect type, nor would it disturb me were I to find someone else actually +surpassing Him, which undoubtedly is the case in some respects.</q> +For him to whom Christ is no longer God but a man and capable of +error, His person and existence have necessarily lost their value. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Thus we have arrived at a <emph>Christianity without a Christ</emph>. +As yet the person of the Lord is usually surrounded by a halo: +<pb n='283'/><anchor id='Pg283'/> +it is the after-effect of a faithful past, the last rays of a setting +sun. That this last glimmer, too, will pale and give way to +darkness is but a question of time, when with more honesty expression +will be given to the conclusion necessarily arrived at. +If Christ is not what He claimed to be, God and Messiah, then +the belief in His being the Son of God and the Messiah, in +His right to abrogate the religion of the Old Testament and +to found a new religion, commanding its acceptance under +penalty of damnation—all this can be nothing but the result +of religious fanaticism and mental derangement. And science +is, in all seriousness, preparing to turn into this direction. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It is true, many are hesitating to draw these fearful conclusions +and to utter them; arriving at this point, they cautiously stop: so +<hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>. <q>How Jesus could arrive at the consciousness of His unique +relation to God as His Son, how He became conscious of His power as +well as of the obligation and task involved in this power, that is His +secret, and no psychology will ever disclose it.... Here, all research +must halt.</q> It is the silence of embarrassment, but equally of unscientific +method. Having arrived at untenable conclusions, when +question upon question is impetuously suggested, they stop suddenly +and have nothing to say but a vague word about inscrutableness. +</p> + +<p> +But there are those who actually speak the word so horrible to a +Christian heart: Jesus was demented, a subject for pathology. <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi> +indicated this cautiously: <q>One who expects to return after his death +in a manner in which no human being had ever returned, he is to us +... not exactly a lunatic, but a great visionary.</q> Others speak +more plainly. <hi rend='italic'>Holtzmann's</hi> answer to the question: Was Jesus an +Ecstatic, is an emphatic: <q>Yes, He was.</q> <hi rend='italic'>De Loosten</hi> considers him +insane. <hi rend='italic'>E. Rasmussen</hi> thinks Him an epileptic, but grants to physicians +the right to reckon him among paranoiacs or lunatics. To <hi rend='italic'>A. Jülicher</hi> +Jesus is a visionary, <q>a mystic, not satisfied to dream of his ideals, +but who lived with them, worked with them, even saw them tangibly +before his eyes, deceiving himself and others.</q> Thus the supernatural +has become madness; Jesus Christ, for whose divinity the martyrs +went to their death, wears now, before the forum of a false science, +Herod's cloak of foolishness. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +With the fall of this fundamental dogma there must necessarily +fall all other specific truths of Christianity, and they +have fallen. The Holy Writ, once the work of the Holy Ghost, +has now become a book like the Indian Vedda, to some perhaps +even more unreliable; original sin, Redemption and grace, the +Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments, have been dropped or +<pb n='284'/><anchor id='Pg284'/> +changed into symbols, of which every one may think what he +pleases. They have tried to make Christianity <q>acceptable to +our times,</q> to <q>bring it nearer to the modern idea.</q> There is +really nothing left to offend modern man, nothing that could +get in conflict with any idea. The essence of Christianity is +depreciated and emptied until it has become only a vague +sentiment, without thought; a few names, without ideas. +<q>Christianity as a Gospel,</q> so teaches <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>, <q>has but one +aim: to find the living God, that every individual may find +Him as his God, gaining strength and joy and peace. How it +attains this aim through the centuries, whether with the Coefficient +of the Jewish or the Greek, of flight from the world or +of civilization, of Gnosticism or Agnosticism—this all is of +secondary consideration.</q> Of secondary consideration it is, then, +whether one is convinced of the existence of God or whether +he doubts with the agnostics, whether he believes in a personal +God or not. To-day even the pantheist who does not acknowledge +a Creator of Heaven and Earth may be a Christian; and so +can he who no longer believes in personal immortality and in +a hereafter; for, we are informed, <q>this religion is above the +contrasts of here and the beyond, of life and death, of Reason +and Ecstatics, of Judaism and Hellenism</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>). Thus +there is no thought which could not be made to agree with this +despoiled Christianity. For, we are told further, <q>much less +does the Gospel presuppose, or is joined to, a fixed theory of +nature—not even in a negative sense could this be asserted</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>). Materialism and Spiritualism, Theism and Pantheism, +Belief or Negation of Creation, everything will harmonize +with a Christianity thus degraded to a thing without +character or principle.<note place='foot'><q>But for the retention of names and terms <hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi> leaves nothing +of the specific nature of Christianity,</q> admits the Protestant Professor +of Theology, <hi rend='italic'>W. Walther</hi>, in his book, <q>Harnack's Wesen des Christentums</q> +(1901).</note> +</p> + +<p> +All that is left is a word of love, of a kind Father, of filiation +to God, and union with God: words robbed of their true meaning; +a shell without a kernel, ruins with the name <q>Christianity</q> +still inscribed thereon, telling of a house that once +<pb n='285'/><anchor id='Pg285'/> +stood here, wherein the fathers dwelt, but long since vacated +by their children. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Dissipaverunt substantiam suam!</foreign> +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +As to God and divine filiation, everybody is welcome to his own +interpretation. He may form with <hi rend='italic'>O. Pfleiderer</hi> the <q>Neoprotestantism</q> +which, <q>after breaking with all ecclesiastical dogmas, recalled to +mind the truths of the Christian religion, hidden beneath the surface +of these dogmas, in order to realize, more purely and more perfectly +than ever before, the truth of God's incarnation in the new forms of +autonomous thought and of the moral life of human society.</q> Christianity +and God—the symbols of autonomous man! Or he may +follow <hi rend='italic'>Bousset</hi>, to whom nature is God, and in this way combines harmoniously +Christianity and Atheism. <q>This is the forceful evolution +of Christian religion,</q> says he, <q>the notion of redemption, the Dogma +of the divinity of Christ, the trinity, the idea of satisfaction and sacrifice, +miracles, the old conception of revelation—all these we see carried +off by this wave of progress.</q> <q>What is left? Timid people may +think: a wreck. But to our pleasant surprise we found stated at many +points in our inquiry: what is left is the simple Gospel of Jesus.</q> And +what does this simplified Gospel contain? <q>Of course we cannot simply +accept in full the Gospel of Jesus.... There is the internal and the +external. The external and non-essential includes the judgment of the +world, angels, miracles, inspiration, and other things.</q> All this may be +disregarded. <q>But even the essentials, the internal of the Gospel cannot +be simply subscribed to. They must be interpreted.</q> What, then, +is this essential, this internal of the Gospel, and what is its interpretation? +<q>The belief of the Gospel in the personal heavenly Father; +to this we hold fast with all our strength. But we carry this belief +in God into our modern thought.</q> And what becomes then of <q>God</q>? +<q>To us, God is no longer the kind Father above the starry skies. God +is the Infinite, Omnipotent, who is active in the immense universe, in +infiniteness of time and space, in infinitely small and in infinitely large +things. He is the God whose garb is the iron law of nature which hides +Him from the human eye by a compact, impenetrable veil.</q> We see +the belief of the Gospel has dwindled down to atheistic Monism. +</p> + +<p> +As early as 1874 <hi rend='italic'>Ed. von Hartmann</hi>, in his book <q>Die Selbstzersetzung +des Christentums,</q> came to the conclusion that <q>liberal Protestantism +has in no sense the right to claim a place within Christendom.</q> In a +later book his keen examination demonstrates how the speculation of +liberal Protestantism has changed the Christian religion step by step +into pantheism: <q>Not a single point in the doctrine of the Church is +spared by this upheaval of principle, every dogma is formally turned into +its very opposite, in order to make its religious idea conform to the +tenet of divine immanence.</q> +</p> + +<p> +This is called the development of Christianity. It is this <q>religious +progress,</q> the same <q>free Christianity,</q> that they are now +trying to promote by international congresses. The invitation to the +<q>World's Congress for free Christianity and religious progress</q> at +Berlin, in 1910, was signed by more than 130 German professors, including +<pb n='286'/><anchor id='Pg286'/> +47 theologians. We have here the development of the dying +into the lifeless corpse, the progress of the strong castle into a +dilapidated ruin, the advance of the rich man to beggary. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We began our inquiry with the question proposed some years +ago by <hi rend='italic'>D. Strauss</hi> to his brethren-in-spirit: Are we still +Christians? We may now quote the answer, which he gives at +the conclusion of his own investigation: <q>Now, I think, we +are through. And the result? the reply to my question?—must +I state it explicitly? Very well; my conviction is, that if we +do not want to make excuses, if we do not want to shift and +shuffle and quibble, if yes is to be yes, and no to remain no, +in short, if we desire to speak like honest, sincere men, we +must confess: we are no longer Christians.</q> +</p> + +<p> +This is the bitter fruit of autonomous freedom of thinking, +which, declining any guidance by faith, recognizes no other +judge of truth than individual reason, with all the license and +the hidden inclinations that rule it. Protestantism has adopted +this freedom of research as its principle; in consistently +applying it, Protestantism has completely denatured the Christian +religion. If anything can prove irrefutably the monstrosity +and cultural incapacity of modern freedom of research, +it is the fate of Protestantism. Any one capable of seriously +judging serious things must realize here how pernicious this +freedom is for the human mind. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Reduced to Beggary.</head> + +<p> +But the loss is even greater. The better class of paganism +still clung to the general notion of an existing personal God, +of a future life, of a reward after death; it was convinced of +the existence of an immortal soul and a future reward, of the +necessity of religion, of immutable standards for morals and +thought. Has liberal science at least been able to preserve this +essential property of a higher paganism? Alas, no! It has +lost nearly everything. +</p> + +<p> +No longer has it a personal God. While belief in God may +still survive in the hearts of many representatives of this +science, it has vanished from science itself. It begs to be +<pb n='287'/><anchor id='Pg287'/> +excused from accepting any solution of questions, if God is +a factor in the solution. The opinion prevails that <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> has +forever shattered all rational demonstrations of the existence of +God. Yet <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> permits this existence as a <q>postulate,</q> which, +according to <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi>, <q>may be regarded as the attic room, +where God who has been retired from His office may be decently +sheltered and employed.</q> But now He has been given notice +to quit even this refuge. There must be nothing left of Him +but His venerable name, which is appropriated by the new apostasy +in the guise of pantheism or a masked materialism. +Monism is the joint name for it: this is the modern <q>belief +in God.</q> In days gone by it was frankly called <q>atheism.</q> +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This disappearance of the old belief in God is noted with satisfaction +by modern science: <q>It is true,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, <q>the belief in gods ... +is dying out, and will never be resurrected. Nor is there an essential +difference whether many or only one of these beings are assumed. A +monotheism which looks upon God as an individual being and lets him +occasionally interfere in the world as in something separate from and +foreign to him, such a monotheism is essentially not different from +polytheism. If one should insist on such conception of theism, then, of +course, it will be difficult to contradict those who maintain that science +must lead to atheism.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Therefore God, as a personal being, is dead, and will never +come to life again. While there is an enormous exaggeration in +these words, they nevertheless glaringly characterize the ideas +of the science of which <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> is the mouthpiece. It does not +want directly to give up the name of God; it serves as a mask to +conceal the uncanny features of pantheism and materialism. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>The universe,</q> we hear often and in many variations, <q>is the expression +of a uniform, original principle, which may be termed God, +Nature, primitive force, or anything else, and which appears to man +in manifold forms of energy, like matter, light, warmth, electricity, +chemical energy, or psychical process.... These fundamental ideas of +monism are by no means <q>atheistic.</q> Many monists in spite of assertions +to the contrary believe in a supreme divine principle, which penetrates +the whole world, living and operating in everything. Of course, +if God is taken to mean a being who exists outside of the world ... +then it is true we are atheists</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Plate</hi>). We have already seen that +one can even be a Protestant theologian and yet be satisfied with a +<q>God</q> of this description. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +In the place of God has stepped <emph>man</emph>, with his advanced civilization, +radiant in the divine aureole of the absolute as its +<pb n='288'/><anchor id='Pg288'/> +highest incarnation. But what has liberal research done even to +him? According to the Christian idea, man bears the stamp of +God on his forehead: <q>after My image I have created thee</q>; +in his breast he carries a spiritual soul, endowed with freedom +and immortality—<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>gloria et honore coronasti eum</foreign>. Liberal +science pretends to uplift and exalt man; but in reality it +strips him of his adornments, one after the other. He is no +longer a creature of God because this would contradict science. +His birthplace and the home of his childhood are no longer in +Paradise, but in the jungles of Africa, among the animals, +whose descendent man is now said to be. Liberal science, almost +without exception, denies the freedom of will which raises man +high above the beast, and as a rule it calls such freedom an +<q>illusion</q>: of a substantial soul, of immortality, of an ultimate +possession of God after death, it frequently, if not always, +knows nothing. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Let us take up a handbook of modern <hi rend='italic'>Psychology</hi> of this kind, +Wundt's, for instance. We see at a glance that it is a very learned +work. The thirty lectures inform us in minute investigations of the +various methods and resources of psychological research. The reader +has reached the twentieth lecture, and he asks, how about the soul? +The title of the book states that the chapters would treat of the human +soul, but so far not a word has been said about it. But there are ten +lectures more; he continues to turn over the leaves of the book. He +finds beautiful things said about expression and emotions, about instincts +in animal and man, about spontaneous actions and other +things. At last, the third before the last page of the book, there arises +the question, what about the soul, and what does the reader learn? +<q>Our soul is nothing else, but the sum total of our perception, our +feeling and our will.</q> The conviction he held hitherto, that he possessed +a substantial, immortal soul, which remains through changing conceptions +and sentiments, he sees rejected as <q>fiction.</q> The reader learns +that, though he may still use the term <q>soul,</q> he has no real soul, +much less a spiritual soul, least of all an immortal soul. In its stead +he is treated to some learned statements about muscular sensations and +such things, by way of compensation. <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>, too, speaks of the <q>illusions, +based upon the old theories about the soul,</q> and he rejects the +dualistic psychology which <q>mistook an abstract thought, the soul, for +a real being, for an immaterial substance</q>; and which defended this +notion <q>with worthless reasons.</q> +</p> + +<p> +It is manifest that, together with the substantial soul, immortality +is also disposed of. True, here too the word is cautiously retained; +but by immortality is now understood perpetuation in the human +race, in the ideas of posterity, in <q>objective spirit,</q> in the <q>imperishable +<pb n='289'/><anchor id='Pg289'/> +value of ethical possessions,</q> for which the individual has laboured. +Some fine words are said about it, as roses are used to cover a grave. +Yet, it is only the immortality of the barrel of Regulus, or the Gordian +knot in history, the immortality of which the printers' press may partake +in the effect of the books it prints. To quote <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi> again: <q>The +fact of the objective spirit, together with the organic connection of +the generations to one another, form the scientific reality of what +appears in popular, mythological tenets of faith as the idea of personal +immortality ... and which has been defended by the dualistic +psychology with worthless, invalid arguments.</q> The refutation of these +arguments does not bother him. <q>A refutation of these scholastic +arguments is as little needed as a refutation of the belief in the +miracles and demons of former centuries is needed by a man standing +on the ground of modern natural science.</q> This reminds one of +<hi rend='italic'>Haeckel's</hi> method. The latter nevertheless found it worth while in his +<q>Weltraetsel</q> to dispose in thirteen lines of six such arguments, and +then to assure the reader that <q>All these and similar arguments have +fallen to the ground.</q> That the matter in question is an idea that has +been the foundation of Christian civilization and ethics for thousands of +years, that has led millions to holiness; an idea, indeed, that has +been the common property of all nations at all times—this seems to +count for very little. +</p> + +<p> +This technique of a superficial speculation, which, devoid of piety, +casts everything overboard, finds no trouble in disposing of the entire +<emph>spiritual world</emph>. <q>No one is capable,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi> again, <q>of imagining +a purely spiritual reality.</q> This is disposed of. <q>Since the war +between the Aristotle-scholastic and the mechanical method has been +waged, spiritual powers have never played any other part in the +explanation of the world than that of an unknown quantity in +equations of a higher degree, which, unsolvable by methods hitherto +prevalent, are only awaiting the superior master and a new technique +(<hi rend='italic'>sic</hi>) in order to disappear</q> (p. 77 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +With the denial of a personal God and of the immortality of +the soul, true <emph>religion</emph> is abandoned. Of course, there is much +said and written about religion in our days: the scientific literature +about it has grown to tremendous proportions—to say +nothing of newspapers, novels, and plays. One might welcome +this as a proof that this world will never entirely satisfy the +human heart. But it is also a sign that religion is no longer a +secure possession, but has become a problem—that it has been +lost. Even on the part of free-thought it is not denied that <q>only +unhappy times will permit the existence of religious problems; +and that this problem is the utterance of mental discord.</q> Yet +they do not want to forego religion entirely, for they feel that +irreligion is tantamount to degeneration. But what has become +<pb n='290'/><anchor id='Pg290'/> +of religion? It has been degraded to a vague sentiment and +longing, without religious truths and duties, a plaything for +pastime. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +For <hi rend='italic'>Schleiermacher</hi> religion is a feeling of simple dependence, +though no one knows upon whom he is dependent: according to <hi rend='italic'>Wundt</hi> +religion consists in <q>man serving infinite purposes, together with +his finite purposes, the ultimate fulfilment whereof remains hidden +to his eye,</q> which probably means something, but I do not know +what. <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> calls his materialism the religion of the true, good, +and beautiful; <hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi> even thinks, <q>As the realm of science is the real, +and the realm of art the possible, so the realm of religion is the impossible.</q> +Religion having been degraded to such a level, it is no +longer astonishing that religion is attributed even to animals, and +in the words of <hi rend='italic'>E. von Hartmann</hi>, <q>we cannot help attributing a +religious character, as far as the animal is concerned, to the relation +between the intelligent domestic animals and their masters.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +What, finally, has become of the old standard of <emph>morals</emph>? +A modern philosopher may answer the question. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Fouillée</hi> writes: <q>In our day, far more so than thirty years ago, +morality itself, its reality, its necessity and usefulness, is in the +balance.... I have read with much concern how my contemporaries +are at fundamental variance in this respect, and how they contradict +one another. I have tried to form an opinion of all these different +opinions. Shall I say it? I have found in the province of morals a +confusion of ideas and sentiments to an extent that it seemed impossible +to me to illustrate thoroughly what might be termed contemporaneous +sophistry</q> (Le Moralisme de Kant, etc.). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Where is left now to liberal science a single remnant of those +great truths on which mankind has hitherto lived, and which it +needs for existence? There was a God—but He is gone. There +was a life to come, and a supernatural world; they are lost. +Man had a soul, endowed with freedom, spirituality, and immortality; +he has it no longer. He had fixed principles of +reasoning and laws of morals; they are gone. He possessed +Christ, full of grace and truth, he possessed redemption and a +Church; everything is lost. Burnt to the ground is the homestead. +In the blank voids, that cheerful casements were, sits +despair; man stands at the grave of all that fortune gave! +</p> + +<p> +The names alone have survived; now and then they speak +<pb n='291'/><anchor id='Pg291'/> +of God and religion, of Christianity and faith, immortality and +freedom; but the words are false, pretending a possession that is +lost long since. They are patches from a grand dress, once +worn by our ancestors; ruins of the ancestral house that the +children have lost. They are still cherished as the memories of +better times. People thus acknowledge the irreparable forfeiture +which those names denote, without realizing how they pronounce +their own condemnation by having destroyed these possessions.<note place='foot'><hi rend='italic'>Uhlich</hi>, founder of a community of free-thinkers, who died in 1873, +thus describes his evolution from rationalism to atheism: <q>At the +beginning I could say: We hold fast to Jesus, to Him who stood +too high to be called a mere man. Ten years later I could say: God, +virtue, immortality—these three are the eternal foundation of religion. +And after ten more years I could issue a declaration wherein God was +mentioned no more.</q> Similar progress in spiritual disintegration has +been shown by Liberalism in recent years: first it partially abandoned +Christian dogma, without however quite breaking loose from it; in the +eighteenth century rationalistic enlightenment tore loose from all +revelation, adhering only to natural religion: to-day even this is lost.</note> +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Dissipaverunt substantiam suam.</foreign> +</p> + +<p> +The son came to his father. In his heedless anxiety for +freedom he would leave the father's house, to get away from +restraining discipline and dependence. <q>Father, give me the +portion of the goods that falleth to me.</q> And he departed into +a far country. Soon he had spent all and had nothing to appease +his hunger. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Despairing of Truth.</head> + +<p> +These, then, are the achievements liberal research can boast +of in the fields of philosophy and religion: Negations and again +negations; temples and altars it has destroyed, sacred images +it has broken, pillars it has knocked down. Free from Christianity, +free from God, free from the life to come and the supernatural, +free from authority and faith—it is rich in freedom +and negation. But what does it offer in place of all the things +it has destroyed? What spiritual goods does it show to the +expectant eyes of its confiding followers? The most hopeless +things imaginable, namely, despair of all higher truth, mental +confusion, and decay. One other brief glance at the consequences +<pb n='292'/><anchor id='Pg292'/> +and we shall be competent to judge of the fitness of +liberal freedom of thought for the civilization of mankind. +</p> + +<p> +As far as it is inspired by philosophy, modern science confesses +the principle: <q>No objective truth can be positively +known, at least not in metaphysics</q>; restless doubt is the lot +of the searching intellect. We have amplified this elsewhere in +these pages. This result of the modern doctrine of cognition +is not infrequently boasted of. It was good enough, say they, +for the ancients to live in the silly belief of possessing eternal +truth; they were simple and unsuspecting; we know there is +in store for man only doubt and everlasting struggle for truth. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>We confess that we do not know whether there are for mankind +as a whole, and for the individual, tasks and goals that extend beyond +this earthly existence</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>). <q>There is no scientific philosophy of +generally recognized standard, but only in the form of various experiments +for the purpose of defining and expressing the harmony and the +idea of the active principle; consequently there cannot be a final philosophy, +it must be ready at all times to revise any point that previously +seemed to have been established</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). <q>Only to dogmatism,</q> +says another, <q>are the various theories of the world contradictory; to +science they are hypotheses of equal value, which, as they are all limited, +may exist side by side, the theistic as well as the atheistic, the dualistic, +the monistic, and whatever their names may be. Man, who conceives +these hypotheses, is master over them all and makes use of them, here of +one, there of another, according to the kind of the problem he is occupied +with at the time. Thus, he is independent of any view of the world</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>L. von Sybel</hi>). Again we are told: <q>There has been formulated a free +variety of metaphysical systems, none of them demonstrable.... Is it +our task, perhaps, to select the true one? This would be an odd superstition; +this metaphysical anarchy is teaching, as obviously as possible, +the relativity of all metaphysical systems</q> (<hi rend='italic'>W. Dilthey</hi>). Therefore, +nothing but impressions and opinions, and not the truth; indeed, for +the cognition of transcendental, metaphysical truths, they often have +only words of disdain. +</p> + +<p> +<q>The fact should be emphasized,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>G. Spicker</hi>, <q>that philosophy +really is devoid of any higher ideal; that, through its doubt of the +objective cognizability of things above us, outside and inside of us, it has +fallen prey to scepticism, even if philosophers do not admit it and try +to evade the issue with the phrase <q>theory of cognition.</q></q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +A science cannot sink to a lower level than by the admission +that it has nothing to offer and nothing to accomplish. +It is tantamount to bankruptcy. This science undertakes to +nourish the human mind, but offers stones instead of bread; it +<pb n='293'/><anchor id='Pg293'/> +wants to uplift and to instruct, and confesses that it has nothing +to tell. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Amphora coepit institui, currente rota urceus exit.</foreign> +In the beginning a proud consciousness and the promise to be +everything to mankind; at the end mental pauperism and +scepticism, a caricature of science. +</p> + +<p> +This, then, is the terminal at which the free-thought of +subjectivism has arrived: the loss of truth, without which man's +mind wanders restlessly and without a goal. That is the penalty +for gambling boldly with human perception, the retribution for +rebelling against the rights of truth and for the vainglorious +arrogance of the intellect, which would draw only from its own +cisterns the water of life, while alone those lying deep in the +Divine may offer him the eternal fountains of objective truth. +Scepticism is gnawing at the mental life of the world. A scepticism +cloaked with the names of criticism and research, and of +positivism and empiric knowledge, but which, nevertheless, remains +what it is, an ominous demon, liberated from the grave +into which has been lowered the Christian spiritual life, the +spirit of darkness now pervading the world. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>In All Directions of the Compass.</head> + +<p> +They have lost their way, puzzled by mazes and perplexed +with error they are in hopeless confusion; a correlative of +individualistic thinking. If the absolute subject and his experiences +of life are the self-appointed court of last resort, the +result must be anarchy and not accord. This is manifest; +moreover, it is frankly admitted by the spokesmen of freethought. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This anarchy is described in vivid words by Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, recently +the indefatigable champion of freest thought: <q>We no longer have a +Protestant philosophy, in the sense of a standard system. <hi rend='italic'>Hegel's</hi> +philosophy was the last to occupy such a position. Anarchy rules ever +since. The attempted rally around the name of <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> failed to put +an end to the prevalent anarchy, or to the division into small fractions +and individualisms. Then there is the mental neurasthenia of our +times, the absolute lack of ideas, especially noticeable among so-called +educated people.... Billboard art has found a counterpart in billboard-philosophy. +Here, there, and everywhere we meet the cry: here +<pb n='294'/><anchor id='Pg294'/> +is the saviour, the secret ruler, the magic doctor, who cures all ills +of our diseased age.... After a while, the mob has again dispersed +and the thing is forgotten</q> (<q>Philosophia Militans</q>). +</p> + +<p> +<q>There is no uniform philosophic theory of the world, such as we, +at least to a certain extent, used to have,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> elsewhere, +<q>the latest ideas are diverging in all directions of the compass.</q> +When one buildeth up, and another pulleth down, what profit have +they but the labour? (Ecclus. xxxiv. 28). <q>We have no metaphysics +nowadays,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>R. Eucken</hi> in the same strain, <q>and there are not a +few who are proud of it. They only would have the right to be so +if our philosophy were in excellent shape, if, even without metaphysics, +firm convictions ruled our life and actions, if great aims held us together +and lifted us above the smallness of the merely human. The +fact is an unlimited discordance, a pitiful insecurity in all matters of +principle, a defencelessness against the petty human, and soullessness +accompanied by superabounding exterior manifestation of life.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +This is the status of modern philosophy and also of liberal, +Protestant, theology. Of views of the world, of notions and +forms of Christianity, of ideas, essays and contributions to them, +there is choice in abundance. Here, materialistic Monism is +proclaimed, warranted to solve all riddles. There, spiritualistic +Pantheism is retailed in endless varieties. Yonder, Agnosticism +is strutting: no longer philosophy, but facts and reality, is its +slogan. Then comes the long procession of ethical views of +life: <q>Contemplations of life; theories of human existence +surround us and court us in plenty; the coincidence of ample +historical learning with active reflection induces manifold combinations, +and makes it easy for the individual to draw pictures +of this kind according to circumstance and mood; and so we see +individual philosophies whirling about promiscuously, winning +and losing the favour of the day, and shifting and transmuting +themselves in kaleidoscopic change</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Eucken</hi>). <hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi>, although +he lectured with great assurance on his own system, +lamented: <q>Every philosophy comes forth with the pretension +to refute not only the preceding philosophy, but to remedy its +defects, to have at last found the right thing.</q> But past experience +shows, that to this philosophy, too, the passage from Holy +Writ is applicable: <q>Behold, the feet that will carry thee away +are already at the threshold.</q> Indeed, often it has come to pass +that these philosophers themselves bury their ideas, preparatory +to entering another camp. Consider the changes that men like +<pb n='295'/><anchor id='Pg295'/> +<hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Fichte</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Schelling</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>, have essayed in the +short course of a few decades, and we are justified in assuming +that they would again have changed their last ideas had death +not interfered. +</p> + +<p> +Now and then such confusion of opinions is considered an +advantage, the advantage of fertility. To be sure, it is fertility,—the +fertility of fruitless attempts, of errors, and of fancies, +the fertility of disorder and chaos. If this fertility be a cause +of pride for science, then mathematics, physics, astronomy, and +other exact sciences, are indeed to be pitied for having to forego +this fertility of philosophy, and the privilege of being an arena +for contradictory views. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Without Peace and without Joy.</head> + +<p> +After the hopeless shipwreck of the modern, godless thought, +can we wonder at meeting frequently the despondency of <emph>pessimism</emph>? +Is not pessimism the first born of scepticism? At +the close of the nineteenth century we read, again and again, +in reviews of the past and forecasts of the future, how the +modern world stands perplexed before the riddles of life, confessing +in pessimistic mood that it is dissatisfied and unhappy +to the depth of its soul. With proud self-consciousness, boasting +of knowledge and power of intellect, they had entered the +nineteenth century, praising themselves in the words: How +great, O man, thou standest at the century's close, with palm of +victory in thy hand, the fittest son of time! With heads bowed +in shame these same representatives of modern thought make +their exit from the same century. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Of the number that voiced this sentiment we quote but one, Prof. +<hi rend='italic'>R. Eucken</hi>, who wrote: <q>The greatness of the work is beyond doubt. +This work more and more opens up and conquers the world, unfolds our +powers, enriches our life, it leads us in quick victorious marches from +triumph to triumph.... Thus, it is true, our desired objects have been +attained, but they disclosed other things than we expected: the more +our powers and ideas are attracted by the work, the more we must realize +the neglect of the inner man and of his unappeased, ardent longing +for happiness. Doubts spring up concerning the entire work; we +<pb n='296'/><anchor id='Pg296'/> +must ask whether the new civilization be not too much a development +of bare force, and too little a cultivation of the being, whether because +of our strenuous attention to surroundings, the problems of innermost +man are not neglected. There is also noticeable a sad lack in +moral power: we feel powerless against selfish interests and overwhelming +passions: mankind is more and more dividing itself into hostile +sects and parties. And such doubts arouse to renewed vigour the old, +eternal problems, which faithfully accompany our evolution through +all its stages. Former times did not finally solve them, (?) but they +were, at least to a degree, mollified and quieted. But now they are +here again unmitigated and unobscured. The enigmatical of human +existence is impressed upon us with unchecked strength, the darkness +concerning the Whence and Whither, the dismal power of blind necessity, +accident and sorrow in our fate, the low and vulgar in the +human soul, the difficult complications of the social body: all unite +in the question: Has our existence any real sense or value? Is +it not torn asunder to an extent that we shall be denied truth and +peace for ever?... Hence it is readily understood why a gloomy +pessimism is spreading more and more, why the depressed feeling of +littleness and weakness is pervading mankind in the midst of its +triumphs.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Similar, and profoundly true, are the words spoken some years ago by +a noted critic in the <q>Literarische Zentralblatt</q> (1900): <q>A painful +lament and longing pervades our restless and peaceless time. The +bulk of our knowledge is daily increasing, our technical ability hardly +knows of difficulties it could not overcome ... and yet we are not +satisfied. More and more frequently we meet with the tired, disheartened +question: What's the use? We lack the one thing which would +give support and impetus to our existence, a firm and assured view of +the world. Or, to be more exact, we have found that we cannot live with +the view of the world which in this century of enlightenment has +stamped its imprint more and more upon our entire mental life. Materialism, +in coarser or finer form, has penetrated deeply our habits of +thought, even in those who would indignantly protest against being +called materialists; the name seemed to imply scientific earnestness and +liberal views. However, there was still left a considerable fund of old, +idealistic values, and as long as we could draw upon them we saw in +materialism only the power to clear up rooted prejudices, and to open +the road for progress in every field. To the newer generation, however, +little or nothing is left of this old fund, hence, having nothing +else but materialism to depend upon, they are confronted by an appalling +dreariness and emptiness of existence. And ever since the man on the +street has absorbed the easy materialistic principles, and looks down +from the height of his <q>scientific</q> view of life contemptuously upon all +reactionaries, we have become aware of the danger that imperils everything +implied by the collective word <q>humanism.</q> This explains the +plethora of literature which in these days deals with the questions of +a world philosophy.</q> Who is not reminded after reading this mournful +confession of the words of <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>: <q>Restless is our heart, +till it finds rest in Thee</q>? +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='297'/><anchor id='Pg297'/> + +<p> +If it be true, then, that philosophical thought stands in +closest connection with civilization, determining the latter in +its loftier aspects, then the freedom of thought of modern subjectivism +has proved its incompetence as a power for civilization; +it can produce only a sham-civilization, it can incite the minds +and keep them in nervous tension, until, tired of fruitless endeavour, +they yield to pessimism. However painful it may be +to admit it, this freedom of thought is and remains the principle +of natural decadence of all the higher elements of a +culture that is not determined by the number of guns, by +steam-engines, and high-schools for girls, but which consists, +chiefly, in a steadfast, ideal condition of reason and will, from +which all else obtains significance and value. What further +proof of intellectual and cultural incompetence can be demanded +which this principle has not furnished already? +</p> + +<p> +If this be the fact, then it follows in turn that in the life +of higher culture, where the health of the soul and the marrow of +mental life is at stake, there can rule but a single principle, the +<emph>objectivism of Christian thought</emph>, the principle of absolute +submission, without variance and change, to a truth against +which man has no rights. The submission of Christian thought +to a religious, teaching authority, recognized as infallible in all +matters pertaining to its domain, while not an exhaustive presentment +of this principle, is its perceptive and concrete effect. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>A Rock in the Waters.</head> + +<p> +The history of human thought of all ages, but especially of the +last centuries, proves how necessary a divine revelation is to +man; viz., the clear exposition of the highest truths in the +view of world and of life, emphasized by a divine authority, +which links the human mind to the one immutable truth; not +only in ignorant nations, not only in the man of the common +people, but also, and more especially, in the educated man and +in the scientist, he, namely, who, through the moderate studies +of a small intellect, has collected a little sum of knowledge +that is apt to confuse his limited understanding and to rob him +<pb n='298'/><anchor id='Pg298'/> +of modesty. It is just as manifest that revelation alone does not +suffice, that there is needed also the enduring forum of a teaching +Church, which in the course of centuries gives expression to +truth with infallible, binding authority. +</p> + +<p> +The full truth of this is felt even by those unfavourably disposed +toward this authority. A recent champion of autonomous +freedom of thought, the Protestant theologian, <hi rend='italic'>F. Troeltsch</hi>, +makes this concession in the words: <q>The immediate consequence +of such autonomy is necessarily a steadily more intensified +individualism of convictions, opinions, theories, and practical +ends and aims. An absolute supra-individual union is effected +only by an enormous power such as the belief in an immediate, +supernatural, divine, revelation, as possessed by Catholicism, +and organized in the Church as the extended and continued +incarnation of God. This tie gone, the necessary sequel will +be a splitting up in all sorts of human opinions.</q><note place='foot'>Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Spencer Jones</hi>, an Episcopal clergyman, says in his book, <q>England +and the Holy See</q>: <q>For the Episcopal Church the junction with +Rome, with its sharply defined dogmas, its supreme ministry, and its +firm leadership, is a question of life. More and more the supernatural +belief is replaced by individual opinions, a condition which in itself +causes faith to disappear. A condition like the present, making it +possible that in one and the same congregation the most pronounced +contrariety of opinions in respect to most essential tenets, as well +as a general confusion of minds, is not only tolerated, but directly +welcomed, such a condition cannot endure in the long run.</q></note> +</p> + +<p> +This is to the Catholic a caution to appreciate the ministry +of his Church ever more highly, and to cleave to it still closer. +He will not agree with those who think that in our time the +principle of Authority must retire. The more his eyes are +opened by the present situation, the more clearly he realizes +where thought emancipated from faith and authority has +led, the more he will affirm his conscious belief in authority. +His foothold upon the rock of the Church will be the firmer +the more restless the billows of unsafe opinions rise and roll +about him. The Catholic of mature, Catholic, conviction would +consider it folly to abandon the rock for the restless and turbulent +play of the waves. Many, indeed, who are looking for a +safe place of truth, we see for this reason taking refuge in a +<pb n='299'/><anchor id='Pg299'/> +strong Church; many are impressed by the stability of Catholic +authority.<note place='foot'>A French author, <hi rend='italic'>G. Goyau</hi>, states with truth: <q>What makes the +(Catholic) Church lovable in the eyes of thinking minds outside of +the Church, is just her uncompromising attitude. They see a Church +steadfast, permanent, imperturbable. The stumbling block of yore has +become for them an isle of safety. They are thankful to Rome for +holding before their eyes <emph>the</emph> Christianity, instead of giving them the +choice of several kinds of Christianity, including kinds still unknown, +which they undoubtedly themselves may discover, if so inclined. They +welcome the Roman Church as the <q>Teacher of Faith</q> and <q>Conqueror +of Errors,</q> and, to quote more of the forcible language of the Protestant +<hi rend='italic'>de Pressensé</hi>: <q>they are disgusted with a Christianity for the lowest +bidder, but are impressed by the rigid inflexibility of Catholicism....</q></q> +(Autour du Catholicisme social. I. 1896).</note> +</p> + +<p> +The present situation is similar socially to that of the ancient +world at its close, and also in regard to the spiritual life. +Then, as now, there was learning without idealism, corroded +by scepticism, without harmony and cheer. Then, as now, +there was but one power to offer rescue. Faith and Church. +A longing for help is now also prevailing in the world. It +feels its helplessness. If they only had the conviction of a +<hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi>, who prayed for deliverance from his errors: +<q>When I often and forcefully realized the agility, sagacity, and +acumen of the human mind, I could not believe that truth was +hidden completely from us—rather only the way and manner +how to discover it, and that we must accept these from a +divine authority</q> (<hi rend='italic'>De utilit. credendi</hi>, 8). +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +It was a solemn hour, pregnant with profound significance, +when at midnight at the beginning of this century all the +churchbells of the Catholic globe were ringing, and, while everything +around was silent, their blessed sound was resounding +alone over the earth, over villages and cities, over countries +and nations. Grandly there resounded into the whole world, +over the heads of the children of men about to enter upon a +new century of their history, that the Catholic Church is the +Queen in the realm of mind, that she alone preserves infallibly +the truths and ideals of which mankind is in quest, by which +they are raised above earthly turmoil—those truths and +<pb n='300'/><anchor id='Pg300'/> +ideals in which the heart and mind of earthly pilgrims find +rest and peace on their long journey to the goal of time. Since +she assumed the mission of Him who said, <q>I am the Way +and the Truth,</q> and, <q>I am with you all days, even unto the +consummation of the world,</q> the Church has travelled a long +way through the centuries, has withstood hard times and fierce +storms. And she has faithfully preserved for mankind the +precious patrimony from God's hand. And now, at the dawn +of new times, her bells proclaimed that she is still alive, holding +the old truths in a strong hand. And after another century +the bells of the globe will ring again, they will, so we hope—ring +more loudly and more forcefully, over the nations. And +these bells will also ring over the graves of this present generation, +over fallen giants of the forest and over collapsed towers, +over mouldy books, and the wreckage left by a culture that the +emancipated, fallible human mind created, but which truth did +not consecrate. And again the bells will proclaim to a new +century that God, and the world's history, are thinking greater +thoughts than the puny child of man is capable of thinking +within the narrow compass of his years and of his surroundings. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='301'/><anchor id='Pg301'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Fourth Section. Freedom of Teaching.</head> + +<pb n='303'/><anchor id='Pg303'/> + +<div> +<head>Preliminary Conceptions and Distinctions.</head> + +<p> +Acquisition and distribution, labour and communication +of the fruits of labour, are the two factors that determine +the progress of mankind. Thus the precious metal is mined and +brought to the surface by the labourer, whence it speeds through +the world; thus the faithful missionary journeys into remote +countries, to disseminate there the mental treasures acquired by +study and hard religious effort. And thus science desires to work, +and should work, for the culture and progress of mankind, and +this work is pre-eminently its task. To properly pursue this +vocation science demands freedom, <emph>freedom in research and +teaching</emph>. There is, as we have already pointed out, an important +distinction between the two. Although research and teaching +are mostly joined, the former only attaining its chief end in +teaching, there is a real difference between the two elements; and +not unfrequently they are separated. It makes quite a difference +whether some one within the four walls of his room studies +anarchy, or whether he proceeds to proclaim its principles to +the world; it is quite different whether a man embraces atheism +for his personal use only, or whether he makes propaganda for +it from the pulpit; it makes also a world of difference whether +a man is personally convinced that materialism is the sole +truth, or whether he proclaims it as a science, and is able to +affirm that of the German edition of <q>Welträtsel</q> 200,000 +copies have been sold, of the English edition about as many, and +that a dozen other translations have spread the fundamental +notions of monism broadcast through the world (<hi rend='italic'>E. Haeckel</hi>, +Monismus u. Naturgesetz). Teaching must be viewed from a +different point. Research is a personal function, whereas Teaching +is a social one. This fact, of itself, makes it evident that +teaching cannot be allowed the same measure of freedom as +<pb n='304'/><anchor id='Pg304'/> +research, hence that teaching must be confined within narrower +limits. +</p> + +<p> +But Freedom is demanded not only for research, but also for +teaching, in most cases even an unlimited freedom. It is demanded +as an inalienable right of the individual, it is demanded +in the name of progress, which can be promoted only by new +knowledge. Some countries grant this freedom in their constitutions. +Before discussing this demand and its presumptions, +we shall have to make clear some preliminary conceptions. +</p> + +<p> +First, the meaning of <emph>freedom of teaching</emph>. How is it precisely +to be understood? Freedom in teaching in general means, +evidently, exemption from unwarranted restraint in teaching. +Teaching, however, to use the words of a great thinker of the +past, means <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Causare in alio scientiam</foreign>, to impart knowledge +to some one else (<hi rend='italic'>Thomas Aquinas</hi>, Quaest. disp. De verit. q. XI +al.). Thus the pious mother teaches the child truths about +God and Heaven, the school-teacher teaches elementary knowledge, +the college-professor teaches science. Teaching is chiefly +understood to be the instruction by professional teachers, from +grammar school up to university. Hence freedom in teaching +does not necessarily refer to scientific matters only; we may also +speak of a freedom of teaching in the elementary school. As +a rule, however, the term is used in the narrower sense of freedom +in teaching science. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Here it may not be amiss to mention further distinctions. As we +may distinguish in teaching three essentials, namely, the matter, the +method, and the teacher, so there is a corresponding triple freedom of +teaching. If we regard the matter, we meet with the demand, that no +one be excluded in an unjust way from exercising his right to teach, +that no single party should have the monopoly of teaching: the right to +found free universities also belongs here. It is part of the freedom of +teaching. As it has relation to the state, we shall return to this point +later on. A second freedom, which might be called methodological, concerns +the choice of the method. This is naturally subject to considerable +restraint; not only because the academic teacher may frequently have +to get along without desirable paraphernalia, but also because of the +commission he receives with his appointment, wherein his field and scope +are prescribed. This is necessary for the purpose of the university; the +students are to acquire the varied knowledge needed later on in their +vocations of clergyman, lawyer, teacher, or physician. There is frequent +complaint that this freedom in method is abused to a certain extent, that +the students are taught many fragments of science with thoroughness, +<pb n='305'/><anchor id='Pg305'/> +but too little of that which they actually need later on; they are trained +too much for theoretical work and not enough for the practical vocation. +Thus there is limitation here, too. But this is not the freedom in +teaching which occupies the centre of interest to-day. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The trophy for which the battle is waged is the freedom relating +to the <emph>subject</emph> of teaching; we shall term it <q>doctrinal</q> +freedom in teaching: Shall the representative of science be +permitted to promulgate any view he has formed? Even if +that view conflicts with general religious or moral convictions, +with the social order? Or must this freedom be curbed? This +is the question.<note place='foot'><q>The Independent</q> (New York) of Feb. 2, 1914, reports under +the head <emph>freedom of teaching</emph> the dismissal of a professor from the +Presbyterian University at Easton, Pa. After quoting from the charter +article VIII, which provides <q>that persons of every religious denomination +shall be capable of being elected Trustees, nor shall any person, +either as principal, professor, tutor or pupil be refused admittance into +said college, or denied any of the privileges, immunities or advantages +thereof, for or on account of his sentiments in matters of religion,</q> the +report goes on to say: <q>it appears however, from the investigations +of the committee, that President <hi rend='italic'>Warfield</hi> insists that the instruction in +philosophy and psychology has to be such, as, in his opinion, accords +with the most conservative form of Presbyterian theology.</q></note> +</p> + +<p> +Obviously, teaching need not always be done <emph>verbally</emph>, it can +be done also by <emph>writing</emph>. The professor lectures in the classrooms, +but he may also expound his theories in books; this latter +the private scholar may also do. In this way <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> +and the Fathers are still teaching by their writings, though their +lips have long been silent. True, this way of teaching has not +the force of the spoken word, vibrating with personal conviction, +but it reaches farther out, with telling effect upon masses and +remote circles. Thus, freedom in teaching includes also the freedom +to print and publish scientific theories, hence it includes part +of the <emph>freedom of the press</emph>; in its full meaning, however, +the freedom of the press relates also to unscientific periodicals, +especially newspapers. +</p> + +<p> +A counterpart to the freedom in teaching is presented by the +<emph>freedom in learning</emph>. It concerns the student, and may consist +of the right granted to the <q>academic citizen</q> to choose at his +discretion, but within the restrictions set by his studies, his university, +his teachers, and his curriculum. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='306'/><anchor id='Pg306'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter I. Freedom Of Teaching And Ethics.</head> + +<p> +Now for a closer examination of the problem of freedom of +teaching, from the point of <emph>general ethics</emph>, not of law. +This is an important distinction, not seldom overlooked. The +former point of view deals with freedom in teaching only in as +far as regulated or circumscribed by ethical principles, by the +moral principles of conscience, without regard to state-laws or +other positive rules. The freedom in teaching as determined +by governmental decrees may be called freedom of teaching by +state-right. It may happen that the state does not prohibit +the dissemination of doctrines which may be forbidden by reason +and conscience, for instance, atheistical doctrine. There +may be immoral products of art not prohibited by the state; +yet ethics cannot grant license to pornography. The state +grants the liberty of changing from one creed to another, or +of declaring one's self an atheist; yet this does not justify the +act before the conscience. The statutes do not forbid everything +that is morally impermissible; their aim is directed only at +offences against the good of the commonwealth. Moreover, even +such offences may not be prohibited by statute, for the simple +reason that the enactment of such laws may be impossible on +account of the complexion of legislative bodies, or because of +other conditions. +</p> + +<p> +We will now take the ethical position and try to judge the +freedom of teaching from this point of view. First of all, we +shall have to explain the <emph>social character</emph> of teaching and the +<emph>responsibility</emph> attached thereto. We start again with the meaning +of freedom of teaching. It demands that the communication +of scientific opinions should not be restrained in unwarranted +manner. <q>In unwarranted manner</q>; because, manifestly, not +all bars are to be removed; no one will assert that a man may +teach things he knows to be false. Every activity, including +<pb n='307'/><anchor id='Pg307'/> +scientific activity, must conform to truth and morals. Hence +there is only the question to determine, when is freedom in +teaching morally reprehensible, and when not; which are the +bars that must not be transgressed, and which bars may be disregarded? +Is it allowed or not to teach any opinion, if the +teacher subjectively believes it to be true? Here the views +differ. However, one thing at present is clear: +</p> + +<div> +<head>Freedom of Teaching is Necessary.</head> + +<p> +Also in respect to method. Even the teacher in public and +grammar schools, though minutely guided by the plan of instruction, +must be granted, by the demands of pedagogy, a +certain liberty; he should be free to arrange and to try many +things. Only where individual spontaneity is given play will +love for work be aroused, which in turn stimulates devotion to +the cause and makes for success. This applies with even greater +force to the college-professor, in respect to method, course +of instruction, subject, and the results of his research. He must +be free to communicate them, without consideration for unwarranted +prejudices, or for private and party interests. +</p> + +<p> +If the scientist were condemned to do nothing but repeat +the old things, without change and variance, without improvement +and correction, without new additions and discoveries, all +alertness and impulse would disappear; but his alacrity and +ardour will increase, if allowed to contribute to progress, if +assured beforehand of publicity for the new solutions he hopes +to find, if allowed to promulgate new discoveries. +</p> + +<p> +This freedom is demanded, even more imperatively, by the +vocation of science to work for the progress of mankind, primarily +for the intellectual and through this for the general +progress. The demand in behalf of the individual is even +more urgent in behalf of science at large: no standing still, +ever onward to new knowledge and the enrichment of the mind, +to moral uplift, to a beautifying of life—and ultimately to the +glorification of God! For, verily, the purpose of the whole universe +is the glory of the Creator. Glory is given to Him by +the world of stars, as they speed through space, conforming +<pb n='308'/><anchor id='Pg308'/> +to His laws; glory is given to Him by the dewdrop, as it +reflects the rays of the morning sun; glory is given to Him +by the butterfly, as it unfolds the brilliancy of colours received +from His hand. The chief glory of all is given to Him by the +reason-endowed human mind, developing its powers ever more +fully, the crowning achievement of visible creation, wherein +God's wisdom reflects brighter than the sun in the morning-dew. +And for this is needed the freedom of scientific progress, +which would be impossible without a freedom in teaching. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +And this applies not only to fixed conclusions; it must also be permitted, +within admissible bounds, to teach scientific <emph>hypotheses</emph>. +Science needs them for its progress; they are the buds that burst +forth into blossoms. Had men like <hi rend='italic'>Copernicus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Huygens</hi>, not +been free to propound their hypotheses, the sun would still revolve +around the earth, we still would have <hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy's</hi> revolution of the +spheres, and the results of optical science would be denied us. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>A Twofold Freedom of Teaching and Its Presumption.</head> + +<p> +There cannot be any doubt that science must have freedom +in teaching. But of what kind? One that is necessary and +suitable. Yes, but what kind of freedom is that? Here is the +crux of the question. Now we are again at the boundary line +where we stood, when defining the freedom of science in general, +at the parting of the ways of two contrary conceptions of +man. +</p> + +<p> +One is the Christian idea, and also that of unbiassed reason. +Man is a limited creature, depending on God, on truth +and moral law, at the same time dependent on social life, hence +also dependent on social order and authority; consequently he +cannot claim independence, but only the freedom compatible +with his position. Therefore the barriers demanded by truth +and by the duty of belief are set to his research; hence his +freedom in teaching can only be the one permitted by his social +position; personal perception of truth <emph>and</emph> consideration for +the welfare of mankind will be the barriers of this freedom. +</p> + +<p> +This view is opposed by another, claiming full independence +for both research and teaching, a claim prompted by the modern +philosophy of <emph>free humanity</emph>, which sees in man an autonomous +<pb n='309'/><anchor id='Pg309'/> +being, who needs only follow the immanent impulses of his +own individuality; and this especially in that activity which +is deemed the most perfect, the pursuit of science: this hypostatized +collective-being of the highest human pursuit is also to be +the supreme bearer of autonomism. As a matter of course this +results in the claim for unlimited freedom in teaching, a freedom +we shall term <emph>liberal</emph>: in communicating his scientific view the +scientist need merely be guided by his perception of truth, without +any considerations for external authorities or interests, provided +his communication is a scientific one, viz., observing the +usual form of scientific teaching. This latter limitation is usually +added, because this freedom is to apply to the teaching +of <emph>science</emph> only; to the popular presentation of scientific views, +appealing directly to the masses, such a freedom is not always +conceded. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Research,</q> we are told, <q>demands full freedom, with no other +barrier but its own desire for truth, hence the academic teacher +who teaches in the capacity of an investigator is likewise not to +know any barriers but his inner truthfulness and propriety.</q> <q>In +this sense we demand to-day freedom in teaching for our universities. +The freedom of the scientist and of the academic teacher +must not be constrained by any patented truth, nor by faint-hearted +consideration. We let the word of the Bible comfort us: <q>if this +doctrine is of God, it will endure; if not, it will pass away</q></q> (<hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann</hi>). +Whatever the academic teacher produces from his subjective +veracity must be inviolable; he may proclaim it as truth, regardless +of consequences. <q>The searching scientist,</q> so says another, <q>must +consider only the one question: What is truth? But inasmuch as there +cannot be research without communication(?), we must go a step +further: the teaching, too, must not be restricted. The scientific +writer has to heed but one consideration: How can I present the +things exactly as I perceive them, in the clearest and most precise +manner?</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). <q>Scientific research and the communication +of its results must, conformable to its purpose, be independent of +any consideration not innate in the scientific method itself,—hence independent +of the traditions and prejudices of the masses, independent +of authorities and social groups, independent of interested parties. +That this independence is indispensable needs no demonstration.</q> +<q>Nor can any limitation of the freedom of research and teaching be +deduced from the official position of the scientist or teacher</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Von +Amira</hi>). Just as soon as he begins his research according to scientific +method, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>, adapts his thoughts to scientific rules, customs, and postulates, +he may question Christianity, God, everything; neither state nor +Church must object, no matter if thousands are led astray. +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='310'/><anchor id='Pg310'/> + +<p> +This freedom is pre-eminently claimed for philosophical and +religious thought, for ideas relating to views of the world and +the foundations of social order; because only in this province +is absolute freedom of teaching likely to be seriously refused. +In mathematics and the natural sciences, in philology and kindred +sciences, there is hardly occasion for it; there only petty +disputes occur, differences among competitors, things that do +not reach beyond the precinct of the learned fraternity. +Whether one is for or against the theory of three-dimensional +space, for or against the theory of ions and the like, all that +touches very little on the vital questions of mankind; but the +case is quite different when it comes to publicly advocating the +abolition of private property, to the preaching of polygamy: it is +here where great clashes threaten. Here, also, there enter into +the plan the social powers, whose duty it is to shield the highest +possessions of human society against wanton attack. Nevertheless +the demand is for unlimited freedom in teaching. What, +then, are the arguments used in giving to this exceptional claim +the semblance of justification? This shall be the first question. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Unlimited Freedom in Teaching not Demanded.</head> + +<div> +<head>1. Not by Veracity.</head> + +<p> +Veracity is appealed to first; it obligates the teacher, so it is +said, to announce his own convictions unreservedly, for to +<q>deny one's own convictions would offend against one of the +most positive principles of morals</q>; hence the academic +teacher could not grant to the state the right to set a barrier +in this respect, <q>it would be a violation of the duty of +veracity, which is innate to the teacher's office</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Von Amira</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Was it realized in making this claim what the duty of +truthfulness really demands? This duty is complied with +when one is not untruthful, that is to say, does not state something +to be his opinion when secretly he believes the contrary to +be true; to force him to do this would of course be instigating untruthfulness. +Truthfulness, however, does not require any one to +speak out publicly what he thinks; one may be silent. Or is cautious +<pb n='311'/><anchor id='Pg311'/> +silence untruthfulness? It is oftentimes prudence, but not +untruthfulness. There is a considerable difference between +thinking and communicating thought, even to the scientist. +</p> + +<p> +Or is the scientist <emph>obliged</emph>, for instance, to proclaim publicly +views he has formed contrary to the prevailing principles of +morals,—views he calls the <q>results of his research,</q> so that +mankind at last may learn the truth? Was <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi> in duty +bound to proclaim to the wide world his revolutionary ideas? +Any sober-minded man might have told him he need not worry +about this duty. Has the teacher of science this duty? How +will he prove it? How are they going to prove that it is +incumbent upon an atheistic college-professor to teach his +atheism also to others? Or, must he teach that the fundamental +principles of Christian marriage are untenable, if this has +become his personal opinion? Is it, perhaps, impossible for +him to refrain from such teaching in the lectures he is appointed +to give? This view will mostly prove a delusion. A +conscientious examination of his opinion would convince him +that he, too, had better abandon it, since it is merely an aberration +of his mind. But let us assume that he could neither correct +his views nor refrain from proclaiming them, that he would +declare: <q>I should lie if, in discussing the question in how +far this or that public institution is morally sanctioned, I were +to halt before certain institutions; for instance if, having the +moral conviction that monarchy is a morally objectionable institution, +I omitted to say so</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Th. Lipps</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Well, he has the option to change his branch of teaching, or +to resign his office; he is not indispensable, no one forces him +to retain his office. Indeed, he owes it to <emph>truthfulness</emph> to leave +his post the very instant he finds he is not able to occupy +it in a beneficial way; he owes it to <emph>honesty</emph> to yield his +position, if he has lost the proper relation to religion, state, and +the people, to whom his position is to render service. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>2. Not the Duty of Science.</head> + +<p> +<q>Nevertheless,</q> we are told, <q>the representatives of science +have the duty of freely communicating their opinions; they are +<pb n='312'/><anchor id='Pg312'/> +called by people and state to find the truth for the great multitude, +that is not itself in the position to pursue laborious +research. Where else could it get the truth but from science?</q> +<q>The multitude participates in truth generally in +a receptive, passive manner; only a few pre-eminent minds are +destined by nature to be the dispensers and promoters of knowledge</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>), and with this vocation of science a restriction +of its freedom of speech would be incompatible. +</p> + +<p> +The idea has something enticing about it. It also has its +justification, if the matter at issue concerns things outside of +the common scope of human knowledge, such as the more precise +research of nature, of history, and so on. But the idea +is not warranted when applied to the higher questions of human +life. Here it is based on the false premise that man cannot +arrive at the certain possession of truth without scientific research. +We have demonstrated previously how this notion involves +a total misconception of the nature of human thought. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +There is, beside the scientific certainty, another true certainty, +a natural certainty, the only one we have in most matters, and a +safe guide to mankind especially in higher questions, nay, in general +much safer than science, which, as proved by history, goes easily astray +in such matters. Long before there was a science, mankind possessed +the truth about the principles of life; and it possesses this truth still, +through common sense and, even more, through divine revelation, +which offers enlightenment to every one regardless of science. Here +apply the words of the poet: +</p> + +<lg> +<l><q rend='pre'>Das Wahre ist schon laengst gefunden</q></l> +<l>Hat edle Geisterschaar verbunden</l> +<l><q rend='post'>Das alte Wahre, fasst es an!</q></l> +</lg> + +</quote> + +<p> +Nevertheless, it is claimed, science remains the sole guide to +truth and progress. Must not truth be searched for and struggled +for always anew? There are no patented truths for all +times—each age must sketch its own image of the world, must +form new values. And it is for science to point out these +new roads. Therefore, full swing for its doctrines. <q>Science +knows not of statutes of limitations or prescription, hence of +no absolutely established possession. Consequently real, scientific, +instruction can only mean absolutely free instruction</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). We may be brief. Every line bears the imprint of +<pb n='313'/><anchor id='Pg313'/> +that sceptical subjectivism which we have met so often as the +philosophical presumption of modern freedom of science. +It is the wisdom of ancient sophistry, which even Aristotle +stigmatized as a <q>sham-science,</q> <q>a running after something +that invariably slips away.</q> A freedom in teaching with such +a theory of cognition can never be a factor of mental progress, +least of all when it seeks to rise above a God-given, Christian +truth to <q>higher</q> forms of religion. This, however, is often +the very progress for which freedom in teaching is intended—the +unhindered propagation of an anti-Christian view of the +world. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>3. No Innate Right.</head> + +<p> +Very well, we are told, leave aside the appeal to the province +of science; but it cannot be denied that man has at least an +innate right of communicating his thoughts in the freest manner. +The first right of the human individual, a right which +must not be curtailed in any way, is his right to free development +according to his inner laws, provided the freedom of +the fellow-man is not thereby injured. Hence every man has +the right of freely uttering his opinion, in science especially, +because the free right of others is thereby not infringed upon +in any matter whatsoever. +</p> + +<p> +This is the claim. It is again rooted in the autonomy of +the human subject, the main idea of the liberal view of life, and, +at the same time, the principal presumption of its freedom +of science. It leads to the <emph>individualistic theory of rights</emph>, +which declares freedom to be man's self-sufficient object, viz., +freedom in all things regardless of the weal and woe of +others, no matter if the sequel be error, scandal, or seduction, +if only the strict right to freedom be not violated. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Act outwardly so,</q> says the philosophic preceptor of autonomism, +<q>that the free use of thy free will may be consistent with the liberty of +others according to a general law.</q> <q>This liberty,</q> continues <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>, +<q>is the sole, original right of every man by virtue of his humanity.</q> +And <hi rend='italic'>Spencer</hi> concurrently teaches: <q>Every one is free to do what he +wants, as long as he does not infringe upon the liberty of others.</q> +</p> + +<p> +This is termed the <q>Maxim of Co-existence.</q> Accordingly any +one may say and write anything at will, no matter if people are led +<pb n='314'/><anchor id='Pg314'/> +astray by his errors. Even the government must in no way limit this +freedom, except where rights are violated; to defend religion and +morals against attacks, to guard innocence and inexperience against +seduction, is, according to this theory, not allowed to the state. +<hi rend='italic'>W. von Humboldt</hi> writes: <q>He who utters things or commits actions, +offending the conscience or the morals of other people, may act immorally: +but unless he is guilty of obtrusiveness, he does not injure +any right.</q> Hence the state must not interfere. <q>Even the assuredly +graver case, when the witnessing of an action, the listening to certain +reasoning, would mislead the virtue or the thought of others, even +this case would not permit restraint of freedom.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We are dealing here with that misconception of the social +nature of man which has always characterized liberalism. It +knows only of the right and liberty of the individual; of +his duties to society it knows nothing, not even that men should +not injure the possessions of others, but rather promote them; +nor does it know that men are placed in a society that requires +the free will of the individual to yield to the common weal of +the many. To liberal thought human society is only an accidental +aggregation of individuals, not connected by social unity. +The autonomous spheres of the single individuals are rolling side +by side, each one for itself: wherever it pleases them to roll, +there they are carried by the autonomous centre of gravity, +whatever they upset in their career has no right to complain. +This principle of freedom was given free rein in the economical +legislation of the nineteenth century. Free enterprise, free +development of energy, was the rallying cry; the result was +devastation and wreckage. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Unrestricted Freedom of Teaching Inadmissible.</head> + +<p> +Hence the claim for absolute freedom in teaching is not warranted; +on the contrary, its chief arguments are borrowed from +a philosophy that is unacceptable to the Christian mind. Is it +even admissible? Though not warranted, is it permissible at +least from the viewpoint of ethics? It is not even this. The +claim is ethically inadmissible, because the <emph>religious, moral, +and social</emph> institutions, especially the <emph>Christian faith</emph> and +the Christian morals of mankind, would be seriously injured. +<pb n='315'/><anchor id='Pg315'/> +In other words: The claim that it is permissible to proclaim +scientific theories which are apt to do great <emph>damage</emph> to the +foundations of religious, moral, and social life, especially to +Christian conviction and morals, is ethically reprehensible. +</p> + +<p> +A few remarks in explanation. We merely speak here of the +freedom in teaching relating to the philosophical-religious +foundations of life; that it cannot be the subject of serious +objection in other matters we have previously mentioned. Nor +do we yet inquire what social powers should fix the needed +limitations, whether state or Church should regulate them; +we are merely investigating, from the viewpoint of ethics, what +barriers are set by the law of reason, and would have to be set +even in the absence of state laws, because of the important influence +exercised by scientific doctrine upon the social life—the +social welfare of mankind is the consideration beside the truth +that is decisive in considering freedom in teaching. +</p> + +<p> +The teacher or writer may himself be of the opinion that +his pernicious errors are not dangerous; he may fancy them +even of utmost importance to the world; hence he thinks he has +the right, even the duty, to communicate them to the world. +And do we not hear them all assure us that they desire only the +truth? We do not wish to sit in judgment on the good faith +of them individually; we make no comment when a man like +<hi rend='italic'>D. F. Strauss</hi>, looking back upon the forty years of his career +as a writer, vouches for his unwavering and pure aim for +truth; and when even <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> asserts this of himself. Every +fallacy has made its appearance with this avowal. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +But, by way of parenthesis, there is no reason to boast in a general +way of the sincere aim at truth and the pure mind for the ideal, +alleged to prevail in the modern literature of our times, especially in +philosophical literature. He who stands upon Christian ground knows +that the denial of a personal God, of immortality and other matters, +are errors of gravest consequence. Furthermore, if one is convinced +of the capability of man to recognize the truth, at least in the most +important matters, and if one knows that God has made His Revelation +the greatest manifestation in history, and proved it sufficiently by +documents—indeed, had to prove it; that He will let all who are of good +will come to the knowledge of the truth; then it remains incomprehensible +how modern philosophy considered as a whole is said on the one +hand to be guided by a sincere desire for truth, while on the other +hand it clings with hopeless obstinacy to the most radical errors. +</p> + +<pb n='316'/><anchor id='Pg316'/> + +<p> +Such talk of general sincere searching for truth is apt to deceive the +inexperienced. He who has obtained a deeper insight into modern +philosophy, he who steadily watches it at work, will recall to mind +only too often the word of the Holy Ghost: <q>For there shall be a +time when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their +own desires shall they heap to themselves teachers ... and will indeed +turn away their hearing from the truth and shall be turned +unto fables</q> (2 Tim. iv. 3). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Even if the teacher is himself convinced of the truth and +inoffensiveness of his theory, it does not follow by any means +that society is obliged to receive it. Indeed not. The +state prohibits cults dangerous to the common weal: it does +not intend to suffer damage just because the adherents of such +cults may be in good faith. And if some one thinks himself +called to deliver a people from its legitimate ruler, let it be +undecided whether his purpose is good or not, he will nevertheless +be restrained by rather drastic means from proceeding +according to his idea. This proves that the principle of <q>no +barrier but one's own veracity</q> is not conceded in practical +life. The teacher and author, this is the sense of our +thesis, must ever be conscious of the grave responsibility of +science, against whose power the unscientific are so often defenceless; +his great duty will be to make use of this power +with utmost compunction, to teach nothing whereof he is not +fully convinced, nor to announce for truth anything he is still +investigating. +</p> + +<p> +As we turn to the demonstration of our proposition, a +start from the <emph>definition of scientific teaching</emph> suggests +itself; manifestly this must be decisive for the measure of +its freedom. No doubt, its purpose obviously is: to promote the +weal of mankind by communicating the truth, by guarding +men against errors, especially against those which would most +harm them, by elevating and increasing the blessings of this +life: for knowledge guides man in all his steps, it is the light +on his way. +</p> + +<p> +Science is not self-sufficient. It is an equally false and +pernicious notion to make science a sovereign authority, throning +above man, who must pay homage, and subordinate his +interests to it, but which he must not ask to serve him for +<pb n='317'/><anchor id='Pg317'/> +his own ends in life. There are such notions of science and +also of art. Art, too, it is sometimes claimed, should serve its +own ends only; the demand, that it should edify, or promote +the ideals of society, is deemed a desertion of its purposes, +<q>the furtherance of worldly or heavenly ideals may be eliminated +from its task</q> (<hi rend='italic'>E. von Hartmann</hi>). These are the excrescences +of unclarified cultural thoughts. Since man and his +culture is more and more replacing the divine Ideal, this culture +itself has grown to be the overshadowing ideal of the Deity, without +whom evidently man cannot live. The Egyptians worshipped +Sun and Moon; modern man often burns incense before the +products of his own mind. It is a reversal of the right proportion. +Science and its doctrine are activities of life, results of the +human mind. Activities of life, however, have man for their end, +they are to develop and perfect him: man does not exist for +the clothes he wears—the clothes exist on account of man; the +leaves exist for the sake of the tree that puts them forth, nor +can grapes be of more importance than the vine that has produced +them. +</p> + +<p> +Hence, where science does not serve this end, where it in +consequence becomes not a blessing, but an injury to man, +where it tears down, instead of building up, there it forfeits +the right to exist; it is no longer a fruitful bough on the tree +of humanity, but a harmful outgrowth. Like every organism +actively opposes its harmful growths, society, too, must not +tolerate within its bosom any scientific tendencies which act +as malign germs, perhaps attack its very marrow. +</p> + +<p> +From the true object of science, as above stated, it follows that +it is wrong to disseminate doctrines that are apt to injure mankind +in the possession of the truth, which may even imperil the +authenticated foundations of life. For nobody will deny that +firm foundations are needed to uphold and support the highest +ideals of life; they can no more withstand a constant jarring and +shaking than can a house of frame and stone. Such foundations +are, first of all, the moral and religious truths and convictions +about the Whence and Whither of human life, about +God and the hereafter, the social duties toward the fellow-man, +obedience to authority, and so on. If man is to perform +<pb n='318'/><anchor id='Pg318'/> +burdensome duties as husband and father, if, as a citizen, he +is to do justice to others and yield in obedience to authority, he +must have powerful motives; else his impulses will take the +helm, the sensible, moral being becomes a sensual being who +reverses the order and drives the ship of life towards the cataract +of ethical and social revolution. And these motives must +rest deeply in the mind, like the foundation that supports the +house; they must become identified with it, as the vital principle +penetrates the tree, as the instinct of the animal is part +of its innermost being. If new notions are continually whizzing +without resistance through the mind, like the wind over the +fields, repose and permanence are impossible in human life. +To jolt the foundations invites collapse and ruin. +</p> + +<p> +It is the duty of self-preservation, for which every being +strives, that society guard these foundations of order against +subversion and capricious experimentation. Of the Locrians it +is told that any one desiring to offer a resolution for changing +existing laws, was required to appear at the public meeting with +a rope around his neck. He was hanged with it if he failed to win +his fellow-citizens over to his view. This custom pictures the +necessity of erecting a powerful dam against the inundation by +illicit mental tidal waves, that endanger the stability of the +order of life. This, of course, does not oppose every new progress. +In building a house, firm foundations do not prevent the +house from growing in size; but the foundations are a necessary +preliminary to a suitable construction. Under no circumstances +must a man be permitted, in his individualistic mania +for reform, to lay an impious hand at the fundamental principles +of life; and the scientist must bear in mind the fact that +it is not the task and privilege of his individualistic reason +to put the seal of approval on these principles as if the truth +had never before been discovered. +</p> + +<p> +To <emph>Christian</emph> nations the immutable truths of Christianity +are these safe foundations. They are vouched for by divine +authority, they have stood all historical tests of fitness; they +sustain the institutions of family and of government, they +determine thought, education, the ideas of right and wrong—a +venerable patrimony of the nations. Shall every <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>, +<pb n='319'/><anchor id='Pg319'/> +big or little, be free to attack them? Experiments may be made +with rabbits, flowers, or drugs; but it would violate the first +principle of prudence and justice to allow every Tom, Dick, and +Harry, who may have the neological itch, to experiment on the +highest institutions of mankind. +</p> + +<p> +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Primum non nocere</foreign> is an old caution to the physician; for +many medical practitioners and surgeons not an untimely admonition. +It is asserted, and vouched for by proof, that patients +are made the subjects of experiment for purposes of science; +not, indeed, rich people, but the poor in hospitals and clinics +(comp. <hi rend='italic'>A. Moll</hi>, Arztliche Ethik, 1902). Every conscientious +physician will turn with moral abhorrence from such action. +Indeed, man and his greatest possession, life, is not to be +made the victim of scientific experiment. If this holds good +as to the physical things of life, then how much more of the +ideal things of mankind! +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head><q>Every One to Form His Own Judgment</q>?</head> + +<p> +But, then, cannot every one decide for himself as to the teachings +of science, and reject whatever he thinks to be false? Then +would be avoided all damage that might result from a freedom +in teaching. Science does not force its opinion upon any one. +With due respect for the discernment of its disciples, science +lays its results before them, leaving it to them to judge and +choose, whatever they think is good. +</p> + +<p> +Such words voice the optimism of an inexperienced idealism. +To be sure, were the devotee to science, be he a student at a +university or a reader of scientific works, a clear-sighted diagnostician, +who could at once perceive error, and, moreover, if +he were a mathematical entity, without personal interest in +the matter, the argument might be listened to. But any one +past the immaturity of youth, he, especially, who has earnestly +commenced to know himself, is aware that unfortunately the +opposite is the case. +</p> + +<p> +First the lack of ability to <emph>distinguish error from truth</emph>. +Even when recognized, error is not without danger; it shares +with truth the property to act suggestively, especially when +<pb n='320'/><anchor id='Pg320'/> +it repeatedly and with assurance approaches the mind. And +often error does pose with great assurance, as the result of science, +as the conclusion of the superior mind of the teacher, perhaps +of a famous teacher! It is taken for granted that whatever +serious men assert in the name of science must be right; or, if +not that, there is the overawing feeling that there must be some +justification for the confidence of the assertion. Authority impresses +even without argument, and impresses the more strongly, +the less there is of intellectual independence. The latter is at +lowest ebb at the youthful age. That which in hypnotic suggestion +is intensified into the morbid: the effective psychical +transfer of one's own thought into some one else, occurs in +a lesser form through the influence of the morbid scepsis of +our times; it is a poisonous atmosphere, affecting imperceptively +the susceptible mind which remains long in it. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +For this reason the religious savant, who has to do a great deal with +infidel books, must be on his watch incessantly, even though he has +the knowledge and the intellect to detect wrong conclusions. Thus we +find that great scholars often display a striking fear of irreligious +books. Of Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Mai</hi> it is told: <q>He said—and this we can vouch +for—<q>I have the permission to read forbidden books; but I never +make use of it nor do I intend to do so</q></q> (<hi rend='italic'>Hilger</hi>, Der Index, 1905, 41). +</p> + +<p> +The learned <hi rend='italic'>L. A. Muratori</hi> wrote a refutation of a heretic book. In +the preface he thought it necessary to apologize for having read the +book. He said: <q>The book got into my hands very late, and for a +long time I could not get myself to read it. For why should one read +the writings of innovators except to commit one's self to their folly? I +seek and like books which confirm my faith, but not those which +would lead me away from my religion. But when I heard that the +book was circulated in Italy, I resolved to muster up my strength for +the defence of truth and religion, and for the safety of my brethren.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Saint Francis of Sales</hi>, with touching simplicity, gives in his +writings praise to God for having preserved him from losing his +faith through the reading of heretical books. Of the learned Spanish +philosopher <hi rend='italic'>Balmes</hi> is preserved a saying that he once addressed to two +of his friends: <q>You know, the faith is deeply rooted in my heart. +Nevertheless, I cannot read a fallacious book without feeling the +necessity of regaining the right mood by reading Holy Writ, the +Imitation of Christ, and the writings of blessed <hi rend='italic'>Louis of Granada</hi>.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +What then must happen when the needed training is lacking? +when one easily grasps the objections to the truth, but +cannot find the answer? when one is not in a position to ascertain +<pb n='321'/><anchor id='Pg321'/> +whether the asserted facts are based on truth, whether +something important is kept back, whether there are stated positive +facts, or mere hypotheses, or perhaps even idle suppositions? +If one is not capable to recognize wrong conclusions, to note +the ambiguities of words? Our present treatise cites proof of +it. How many earnest men, who in good faith are the warm +advocates of freedom of science, are aware how ambiguous that +term is; how a whole theory of cognition and view of the world +is hidden behind it? How many can at once see the ambiguity +of phrases like <q>Difference between knowledge and faith,</q> of +<q>experiencing one's religion,</q> of <q>evolution and progress,</q> of +<q>humanism,</q> of <q>unfolding personality</q>? And of the self-conscious +postulate that science cannot reckon with supernatural +factors, how many perceive that it is nothing but an +undemonstrated supposition? We are told that all great representatives +of science reject the Christian view of the world; +who knows at once that such assertion is untrue? We read that +the Copernican theory was condemned by Rome, even prohibited +up to 1835, and this cannot fail to make an impression; but the +part omitted in the story, who will at once supplement or even +suspect it? +</p> + +<p> +Then there is the great <emph>want of philosophical training</emph>. +Formerly a thorough philosophical education was the indispensable +condition for maturity, and considered the indispensable +foundation for higher studies. All this has changed; frequently +there is not even the desire for philosophical training. Of +course, modern philosophy in its present state does not promise +much of benefit. <q>Students of medicine and law remain for the +larger part without any philosophical education, and among those +of the other two faculties but few students do better than come +into a more or less superficial touch with philosophy</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). +The consequence is, they cannot scientifically get their bearings +in respect to ultimate questions, and easily lose their faith, +succumbing to errors and sophisms. +</p> + +<p> +Imagine a young man, untrained; in books, in the lecture +room, in his intercourse, everywhere, he is courted by a disbelieving +science, with its theories, its objections, its doubts,—tension +everywhere that is not relieved, accusations that are +<pb n='322'/><anchor id='Pg322'/> +not explained; how is he to bring with a steady hand order in +all this? To clinch it, he hears the obtrusive exhortation to +form forthwith his own conviction by his own reasoning! +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +He is, moreover, likely to be informed as follows: <q>The university +is a place for mental struggle, for incessant investigation of inherited +opinions. For years and years the student was fed with prescribed +matter which he had to swallow believingly, ... at last the moment +has arrived when he can choose and decide for himself. True, this +freedom of mental choice—and it is the essence of academic freedom—has +also its anguish. But how magnificent it is, on the other hand, +when the gloomy walls of the classroom vanish, and the bright ether of +research dawns into view with its wide horizon! He who cannot grasp +and enjoy this moment in its grandeur and exquisiteness, he who prefers +to the free life of the colt on the vast prairies the dull existence in a +narrow fold ... he has taken the wrong road when he came to the +gates of the Alma Mater to study worldly science—he should have remained +at the restful hearth of the pious, parental home, in the shadow +of the old village-church</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +What a lack of earnestness and of knowledge of man, what lack +of the sense of responsibility! Of young men, without thorough +philosophical and theological preparation, it is demanded to +doubt at once their Christian religion, despite all compunctions +of their conscience, and to argue the dangerous theses of an +anti-Christian view of the world. They are expected, as if they +were heirs to the wisdom of all centuries, to judge and correct +forthwith that which their teachers call the result of their long +studies—for they are not supposed to follow them blindly, +they are expected to sit in judgment over theological tendencies +and philosophical systems, and to struggle through doubts and +aberrations, untouched by error, to display a mental independence +which even the man of highest learning lacks. Such a +knowledge of human nature might be left to itself, if the wrecks +it causes were not so saddening. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>How terrible is the power of science!</q> a voice of authority warned +a short time ago. <q>The unlearned are defenceless against the learned, +those who know little against those that know much; the unlearned +are incapable of independently judging the theories of the learned; +error in the garb of knowledge impresses them with the force of truth, +especially when it finds an ally in their evil lusts. No wielder of +state-power can lay waste, can destroy, as much as an unconscientious, +or even merely careless, wielder of the weapons of knowledge. +<pb n='323'/><anchor id='Pg323'/> +Exalted as is the pursuit of knowledge, and as knowledge itself is if +guided by strong moral sentiment and earnest conscience, so degraded +it becomes if it tears itself from the self-control of conscience. This +fatal rupture will happen the instant science deviates but a hair's +breadth from the truth it can vouch for upon conscientious examination.... +Sacred is the freedom of science keeping within the bounds +of the moral laws; but transgressing them it is no longer science, but a +farce staged with scientific technique, a negation of the essence of +science</q> (Count <hi rend='italic'>A. Apponyi</hi>, former Hungarian Minister of Education, +officiating at a <hi rend='italic'>Promotio sub auspiciis</hi>, 1908). +</p> + +<p> +In the year 1877, at the Fiftieth Congress of Natural Scientists in +Munich, Prof. <hi rend='italic'>R. Virchow</hi>, founder and leader of the Progressive Party +in Germany, sounded a warning to be conscientious in the use of the +freedom in teaching, and in the first place, to announce as the result +of science nothing but what has been demonstrated beyond doubt: +<q>I am of the opinion that we are actually in danger of jeopardizing +the future by making too much use of the freedom offered to us by +present conditions, and I would caution not to continue in the arbitrary +personal speculation, which spreads itself nowadays in many branches +of natural science. We must make rigid distinction between that +which we teach and that which is the object of research. The subjects +of our research are problems. But a problem should not be made +a subject of teaching. In teaching, we have to remain within the +small, and yet large domain which we actually control. Any attempt +to model our problems into doctrines, to introduce our conjectures +as the foundation of education, must fail, especially the attempt to +simply depose the Church and to replace its dogma without ceremony +by evolutionary religion; indeed, gentlemen, this attempt must fail, +but in failing it will carry with it the greatest dangers for science in +general.... We must set ourselves the task, in the first place, to hand +down the actual, the real knowledge, and, in going further, we must +tell our students invariably: This, however, is not proved, it is <emph>my</emph> +opinion, <emph>my</emph> notion, <emph>my</emph> theory, <emph>my</emph> speculation.... Gentlemen, I think +we would misuse our power, and endanger our power, if in teaching we +would not restrict ourselves to this legitimate province.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +And is nothing known of the inclinations and passions, especially +of the youthful heart, to which truth is so often a heavy +yoke, constraining and oppressing them? Will they not try to +use every means to relieve the tension? Will they not gravitate +by themselves to a science that tells them the old religion with +its oppressive dogmas, its unworldly morals, is a stage of evolution +long since passed by, and that many other things, once +called sin by obsolete prejudices, are the justified utterances of +nature? Will they not worship this science as their liberator? +He who once said <q>I am the truth,</q> He was crucified; a sign +for all ages. Base nature will at all times crucify the truth. +<pb n='324'/><anchor id='Pg324'/> +<hi rend='italic'>F. Coppée</hi>, a member of the French Academy, led back by severe +sickness to the faith of his youth, relates the following in his confessions: +<q>I was raised a Christian, and fulfilled the religious duties +with zeal even for some years after my first Holy Communion. What +made me deviate from my pious habits were, I confess it openly, the +aberrations of youthful age and the loathing to make certain confessions. +Quite many who are in the same position will admit, +if they will be frank, that at the beginning they were estranged +from their creed by the severe law which religion imposes on all in +respect to sensuality, and only in later years they felt the want to +extenuate and justify the transgressions of the moral law by a +scientific system.</q> <q>Having taken the first step on the downward +road, I could not fail to read books, listen to words, see examples, +which confirmed my notion that nothing can be more warranted +but that man obey his pride and his sensuality; and soon I became +totally indifferent in respect to religion. As will be seen, my case is +an everyday case.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Only exalted moral purity can keep the mind free from being made +captive and dragged down by the passions. +</p> + +<p> +In a college town in southern Germany a Catholic Priest some +time ago met a college girl who belonged to a club of monists. +They started upon a discussion, and soon the college girl had no argument +left. But as a last shot she exclaimed, <q>Well, you cannot prevent +me from hating your God.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Prof. <hi rend='italic'>G. Spicker</hi> relates in his autobiography instructive reminiscences +of his college years. Religiously trained in his youth, and +in his early years for some time a Capuchin, he left this Order to go to +the university. Previous to this he had been led to doubt by the +perusal of modern philosophical writings, and at Munich he sank still +more deeply into doubt. Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Huber</hi> advised him to hear the radical +<hi rend='italic'>Prantl</hi>. In his dejection he went to a fellow-student in quest of +comfort, and received the significant advice: <q>Indeed, <hi rend='italic'>Huber</hi> is right: +you are not a bit of a philosopher; you still believe in sin, that is +only a theological notion; go and hear <hi rend='italic'>Prantl</hi>, he'll rid you of your +fancies.</q> Of the impression <hi rend='italic'>Prantl's</hi> lectures made upon the susceptible +young students he relates: <q>They were especially overawed by +his passionate enthusiasm, his trenchant criticism, his sarcastic treatment +of everything mediocre and superficial, and, chiefly, by his self-conscious, +authoritative, demeanor. Like a tornado he swept through +hazy, obscure regions, whether in science, art, poetry, or religion. +Even by only attending the lectures one became more conscious of one's +knowledge and looked down with silent contempt upon semi-philosophers +and theologians.</q> In regard to himself he admits that a few weeks +sufficed to destroy the last remnants of his former religious persuasion: +<q><hi rend='italic'>Huber's</hi> prophecy was completely fulfilled, the last stump of my +dogmatic belief was smashed into a thousand splinters.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Vae mundo a scandalis!</foreign> What a responsibility rests especially upon +those who become the scandal for inexperienced youth! +</p> + +<p> +In the upper classes of a largely Protestant college in northern +Germany the professor of mathematics, some years ago, asked the +<pb n='325'/><anchor id='Pg325'/> +question, who among the students had read <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel's</hi> <q>Weltraetsel.</q> +All except four or five rose to their feet. Upon his further question, +who of them believed in what is said in the book, about half of the +classroom rose. <q>The immature youth who read the <q>Weltraetsel,</q></q> +so says <hi rend='italic'>A. Hansen</hi>, <q>unfortunately conclude: <q><hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> says there is no +God, therefore we may boldly live as it suits our natural immorality....</q> +Is <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> the strong mind to assume for a long future +the responsibility for this conclusion?</q> +</p> + +<p> +One is frightened by the manner the highest ideals of mankind +are often juggled with, what they dare offer with easy conscience +to the tenderest youth. Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Forel</hi> is known by his widely spread +book on <q>The Sexual Question,</q> perhaps better known even by his +lectures on the subject, which some cities prohibited in the interest of +public morals. In the seventh edition of his book we find published +as a testimonial, also as proof of the good reading the book makes for +early youth, a letter of a young woman whose opinion of the book +had been requested by the author. Her answer reads: <q>You ask me +what impression your book made upon me. I should state that I +am very young, but have read a great deal. My mother has given +me a very liberal education, and so I have a right to count myself +among the unprejudiced girls.</q> She assures the author: <q>I never +thought for a single moment that your book was immoral, hence I +do not believe that you have corrupted me.</q> And such books are +offered to young girls as fit reading! +</p> + +<p> +Some years ago a sensation was created when in Berlin a young +author, twenty-two years of age, <hi rend='italic'>George Scheufler</hi> by name, killed himself. +Though of a religious training, he began at an early age to read +the writings of infidel natural scientists and philosophers. His belief +became weaker and weaker, and he finally abandoned it entirely. Only +a few years afterwards, the young man, who had become a writer of +repute, put a revolver to his heart, nauseated by the world, tortured by +religious doubts. An organ of modern infidelity commented upon +the event in the cold words: <q>The truth is probably that the undoubtedly +talented author had not nerves strong enough for the Berlin +life, hence he dies. May his ashes rest in peace!</q> Heartless words on +the misfortune of a poor victim of the modern propaganda of disbelief. +</p> + +<p> +Heavy, indeed, is the responsibility courted by representatives +of science when they sin against the holiest ideals of mankind, +especially when they induce the maturing youth, with his susceptibilities +and awakening impulses, to emancipate himself from +the belief of his childhood, and to tear down the fortifications of +innocence! If the teacher is high-minded, this cannot mitigate +the perniciousness of his teaching, but only increase it, neither +can the fact that his personal morals are without a flaw vindicate +him. If a man by strewing poison does no harm to himself, +this does not give him the right to injure others. If science +<pb n='326'/><anchor id='Pg326'/> +demands the privilege of assuming the mental education of +our people, then science assumes also the duty of administering +these interests conscientiously, and the gravest responsibility +will rest upon him in whose hand science spreads ruin. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head><q>Knowledge does no Harm</q>?</head> + +<p> +<q>The increase and spread of knowledge</q> (this is a further +objection) <q>can never harm society, only benefit its interests</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Von Amira</hi>). Hence, do not get alarmed: nothing is to be +feared from science. The apostles of the enlightened eighteenth +century tried to quiet their age with similar assertions. <q>It is +not true,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Lessing</hi>, <q>that speculations about God and +divine things have ever done harm to society; not the speculations +did it—but the folly and tyranny to forbid them.</q> +</p> + +<p> +If this were amended to read <emph>true</emph> knowledge can never do +harm, then the mind might be set at rest, although even then +it might become dangerous to teach the truth without discrimination +or caution. Not all are ripe for every truth: truth can +often be misunderstood, lead to false conclusions. Thus, it may +become certain, perhaps, that a much-worshipped relic, a much-visited +shrine, is not genuine: nevertheless in giving such explanation +to simple, pious people one would have to display +caution in order to keep them from doubting even the tenets of +the creed. +</p> + +<p> +But there is also false knowledge; can this <q>never do harm +but only benefit?</q> Will all knowledge exert the same influence, +whether the Christian tenets of love and mercy, or <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche's</hi> +moral for the wealthy, whether young people are given to +read Christian books, or those of <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Buechner</hi>, and +<hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi>? The story is told of <hi rend='italic'>Voltaire</hi>, that he sent all servants +out of the room when he had friends for guests and philosophical +discussions started at the dining-table, because he did not +wish to have his throat cut the next night. So this free-thinker, +too, did not think that all knowledge is beneficial. +</p> + +<p> +But, we are further assured, let science peacefully pursue its +way; if it should err it will correct itself. +</p> + +<p> +It is true, sciences of obvious subjects, that have no direct +<pb n='327'/><anchor id='Pg327'/> +relation to moral conduct of life, do, sooner or later, correct +their mistakes; recent physics has corrected the mistakes of +the physics of past ages; historical errors, too, are disappearing +with the times. Quite different is the matter when philosophical-religious +questions are at issue. Pantheism, subjectivism, +<q>scientific</q> rejection of faith, are errors, grave errors, +yet it does not follow that they will fall of themselves into +desuetude; they may prevail for a long time, may return with +the regularity of certain diseases. Their error is not tangible, +and the desires of the heart incline to them by the law of least +resistance. From the earliest ages to this day the same philosophical +errors have returned, in varied form. +</p> + +<p> +But let us assume that this would be the case; that these +errors, too, would disappear after some time, disappear for +good. Is it demanded that the errors in the meanwhile ought +to have free play? Shall the surgeon be allowed to perform +risky experiments on the patient, because later on he will realize +that his act was objectionable? Will the father hand to +his son an improper book, consoling himself that truth must +prevail in the end, even though defeated temporarily? +</p> + +<p> +These are delusions of the abstract intellectualism of our +times, which sees all salvation and human perfection merely in +learning and knowledge, and forgets that knowledge signifies +education and benefit for mankind only when attached to truth +and moral order. Not knowledge, but knowledge of the truth, +and moral dignity, make for civilization and perfection; knowledge +no longer controlled by truth and ethics becomes the hireling +of the low passions, and fights for their freedom. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head><q>The Vehicle of Truth.</q></head> + +<p> +Back of the urgent demands for unrestricted freedom in teaching +stands invariably a thought that operates with palsying +effect upon the minds: to wit, that science is the embodiment +of truth, a genius carrying the unextinguishable beacon of light: +to silence it would be to resist the truth. +</p> + +<p> +Our first thought when we began our dissertation of the +Freedom of Science was, that science is not the poetical being so +<pb n='328'/><anchor id='Pg328'/> +often described: it is an individual activity, a product of the +human mind, sharing its defects and weaknesses. For this +reason science is not the infallible bearer of the truth; least of +all in the higher questions of life, where its eyes are dimmed, +and where inclinations of the heart still further obscure its +strength of vision. And this is admitted, even to the point of +despairing of the ability to find the truth on these questions, and +if one is not ready to admit this, the fact is made apparent by a +glance at the countless errors exhibited in the history of human +thinking. +</p> + +<p> +Is error to have the same right that truth has? If wholesome +beverage may rightly be offered to anybody, can, with the +same right, poison be given? May one follow his false sense +of truth, calling it science, and teach anything he thinks right? +</p> + +<p> +Moreover, is not this science, which, according to its exponents, +need not regard anything but its own method, entirely a <emph>special +kind of science</emph>? Indeed it is, as we have learned to know it. +We have learned to know this free science, with its autonomous +subjectivism, that shapes its changing views according to +personal experience; this feeble but proud scepticism; we +have learned of those ominous imperatives, that banish everything +divine from the horizon of knowledge—a science with +its torch turned upside down. And its aim—negation. The +beautiful thought is frequently expressed that science, especially +the science of our universities, is to act as the leader in the +mental life of the nation, <q>a universal Parliament of science, +which would represent the authoritative power so urgently +needed by our discordant and sceptical age, an age that has lost +faith in authority.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The idea is beautiful, it is sublime; it coincides with a conception +of the divine Spirit, who has already realized it, though, +it is true, in another manner. The divine Spirit has founded +in the bosom of mankind such a centre of mental life; namely, +the Church. She, and only she, bears all the marks of the universal +teacher of truth. By virtue of divine aid the Church +alone has the prerogative of infallibility, as necessary to the +teacher of the nations; human philosophy is not infallible, least +of all a science that despairs of the highest truth, nay, that often +<pb n='329'/><anchor id='Pg329'/> +deals with it as the cat does with the mouse. A teacher of the +nations must possess unity of doctrine. The Church has this +unity, her view of the world stands before us in perfect concord; +while discord reigns in the philosophy of a free mankind, one +thought opposed to another. The Church is holy, holy in her +moral laws, holy in her service of the truth; she never shirks +truth, not even where truth is painful; the Church never surrenders +the truth to human passions. The Church is Catholic, +general, for the learned and the unlearned; she is apostolic, +with faithful hand she preserves for all generations the spiritual +patrimony of the forefathers. And the unbelieving science of +liberalism, where is its holiness, when its eye cannot bear the +sight of heaven? when it numbers among its admirers all the +unholy elements of humanity? Where is its catholicity, its +reverence for traditions, its historic sense, the indispensable +requirement for the teacher of centuries? The ruins of overthrown +truths, amongst which wanton thought holds its orgies, +bear witness to the unfitness of infidel science to be the teacher +of mankind. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Serious Charges.</head> + +<p> +The science of our day must often listen to charges of the +gravest nature. They are uttered not only by servants of the +Church, but in public meetings, legislative bodies, and in +numerous articles by the press: science, we are told, has become +a danger to faith and morals, it has become the teacher +of irreligion, a leader in the war against Christianity. The +force of the accusation is felt and attempts are made to ward it +off. And then we are assured that science is not the enemy of religion, +nor of the precious possessions of society. +</p> + +<p> +It is clear, without further proof, that science in itself +cannot be a social danger; hence the charge cannot apply to +science in general, but only to that special brand of science +cultivated in an <emph>anti-Christian</emph> spirit. The assurance from its +champions, that their intentions are the best, may often be a +proof that they do not realize the scope of their doctrines; nevertheless, +it cannot be denied that this science has become, through +its principles, as taught in lectures and in print, the greatest +<pb n='330'/><anchor id='Pg330'/> +danger to the religious-moral possessions of our nations and to +the foundations of public order, hence an unlimited freedom for +the activities of this science means unlimited freedom for a destructive +power that spells ruin to our mental culture. +</p> + +<p> +Can the principles of this science be anything but a danger? +Their sharp antagonism to the principle of authority, must it +not undermine the respect for state authority, must it not +strengthen the elements of social disorder? Its contempt of +sacred traditions, must it not become a danger to everything +existing? <q>If all mankind were of one opinion,</q> it teaches, +<q>and but one single man were of a different opinion, then mankind +would have no more right to impose silence on him than +he to silence all of mankind, if he could,</q> must not such an individualism +become the fertile soil of revolutionary ideas? +Its ethics without religion tells every one that his own individuality +is the court of last resort for his moral doings, that +moral laws are subject to change, and must such views not +become a danger to moral order? Finally, the separation of +mankind from God and its eternal destiny, must it not necessarily +lead the whole of life to materialism? and from the +scullery it is not far to the sewer. Through its antagonism +to Christian faith this science becomes the chief factor in +dechristianizing the nations. +</p> + +<p> +It is objected that this accusation is not true, because science +addresses itself to <emph>professional circles</emph> only; the people, of +course, cannot digest these things, therefore religion is to be +preserved for the people. +</p> + +<p> +Why this distinction? The principles of liberal science of +to-day are either true or they are not true. If not true, why +profess them? If they are true, as is vehemently asserted, +then why should the people be excluded from a true view of +the world? Have the people not an equal right to the truth +in important questions, equal right to light and happiness? +Ah, the consequences of this doctrine of freedom are feared; +it is feared the people's natural logic would take hold of these +principles and draw from them its conclusions. And by that +very fear these principles stand condemned of themselves. The +truth can stand its consequences, as does the Christian view +<pb n='331'/><anchor id='Pg331'/> +of the world; and the more zealously its consequences are pursued, +the more blessed the fruits. It is otherwise with error. +Therefore, if the principles of liberal science cannot stand their +consequences, they must be erroneous. <q>Consider chiefly to be +good that which enhances when communicated to others,</q> is a +wise maxim of the Pythagoreans. Anything spelling damage +and ruin, when communicated to others, is not good, but evil. +</p> + +<p> +Nor is it true that science confines itself to professional +circles. Any one who does not lead the isolated existence of +pedantry knows that this is not the case. What the professor +of our day teaches in the lecture room, finds its way into the +minds of his students, and from there into preparatory and +public schools; ideas committed by the scientific writer to paper +and print, go into all the world, and, transformed into popular +speech, become the common property of the millions. The +flood of books, pamphlets, and leaflets attacking and vilifying +the Christian tenets of faith is ever swelling, and day by day +tons of this literature are spread without hindrance over Christian +countries. There is not a single book against the Christian +truth, be its author named <hi rend='italic'>Feuerbach</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Strauss</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Carneri</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>, or otherwise, that does not soon circulate +in popular editions in every country, or at least has to lend its +subject to pamphlets and booklets, which then carry these <q>results +of science</q> to every nook and corner, to the remotest backwoods +village. And the fruits? All those who in these days +profess infidelity and radicalism, they all unanimously profess +adherence to modern free science. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Tell Me with Whom Thou Goest.</head> + +<p> +In stately array they come along nowadays, free-thinkers and +freemasons, free-religionists and representatives of the free view +of the world, monists, agitators for <q>free school</q> and socialists, +all impetuously active in the service of anti-Christianity, bent on +reviving and spreading ancient heathendom. All are avowed +disciples of free science, all spread its doctrines, and all work +for the popularizing of their ideas. There they press on, the living +proof that modern science, as far as it is infidel, has become, +<pb n='332'/><anchor id='Pg332'/> +voluntarily or involuntarily, the teacher of radicalism, of paganism, +and the leader in the battle against religion and Christian +morals. +</p> + +<p> +And in its train is marching Free-thought in all its varieties. +Its aim at destruction, its dismal designs against religion and +state, have become manifest in its books and conventions; for +instance, the international free-thinker conventions lately held at +Rome and at Prague were plainly of anarchistical sentiment. +In their midst we see men of science, academic +teachers. Under their auspices are arranged <q>scientific lectures</q> +to make known the <q>results of modern science,</q> with +the conviction that this will suffice for the overthrow of religion; +they demand that <q>the instruction in public institutions be +only a scientific one</q>; itinerant orators are sent to speak with +preference on <q>Science and the Church,</q> on the theocratic +view of the world and free science. The doctrines of liberal +science are adopted by freemasonry, its rallying-cry is <q>freedom +from God, freedom of the human reason.</q> And following the +band-wagon of free science, we see a shouting and jeering multitude, +its clenched fists threatening any one who would dare to +attack this fine science, their liberator from the yoke of religion; +they are the thousands of the common people, whose faith +has been torn out of their hearts, and, with faith, also peace +and good morals. We see marching there hundreds from +the ranks of youth, who in the heedless impulse of their inexperience +have cast off belief, and, with belief, frequently all moral +discipline; they, too, look upon science as their liberator. The +morally inferior part of mankind, which declares anything to +be ethical that <q>promotes life</q>; which fights against <q>love-denying +views</q> and against obsolete maxims of morals, it, too, +follows in the tracks of free science. And wherever the issue +is to fight Christian institutions, under the name of marriage-reform, +free-school, or what not, there we are sure to see representatives +of science and of universities, and to hear them hold +forth for free science. +</p> + +<p> +Where the purpose is to kindle the fires of revolt against +religious authority, there we are certain to meet in the first +rank the modern teachers of science. +</p> + +<pb n='333'/><anchor id='Pg333'/> + +<p> +Science and its representatives have an ideal vocation. They +should be the hearth of the spiritual goods of the nations; new +and wholesome forces should at all times emanate from the abodes +of science, and the people should look up with confidence to these +watch-towers of knowledge and truth. What a shocking contrast +to this exalted ideal it is, to hear time and again the believing +people and their leaders raise a complaining and indignant +voice against a science that has become a most dangerous +antagonist to their holiest goods! Is it not painful to see +the devout mother apprehensively cautioning her son, who departs +for the university, not to let his faith be taken from him +by teaching and association? Is it not sad to observe that +it has become the common saying: <q>He has lost his faith at +the university</q>? Is it not regrettable to see that Catholic +universities have become necessary to preserve the ideal goods of +the Christian religion? It is unavoidable that such complaints +are sometimes exaggerated. In their generality they include universities +that have given small reason for them; honourable men +and representatives of sciences who should not be reproached are +being mixed up in these charges. But it is true, nevertheless, +that many have given such occasion. Is it not true also that +many remain silent instead of protesting in the name of true +science? that they feel it incumbent upon themselves to protect +such a procedure, for the sake of the freedom of science? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +For a generation and longer, <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> misused science to make war +upon religion, and went to the extreme in his scientific outrageousness, +not even stopping at forgery. Professor <hi rend='italic'>W. His</hi> had already in 1875 +expressed his opinion of <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> in relation to the false drawings of his +embryonic illustrations in the words: <q>Others may respect <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> as +an active and reckless leader: in my judgment he has on account of his +methods forfeited the right to be considered an equal in the circle of +serious investigators.</q> When Dr. <hi rend='italic'>Brass</hi>, a member of the Kepler Bund, +recently disclosed new forgeries of this kind, it should have been made +the occasion for a protest in the interest of science and its freedom +against such methods. Instead of that, however, forty-six professors of +biology and zoölogy published a statement in defence of <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi>, declaring +that while not approving of <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel's</hi> method in some instances, they +condemned in the interest of science and of freedom of teaching most +strongly the war waged against <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel</hi> by <hi rend='italic'>Brass</hi> and the Kepler +Bund. Is the freedom to use methods like <hi rend='italic'>Haeckel's</hi> included in the +freedom of teaching, which they consider must be defended? Can it +surprise any one that this freedom of teaching is viewed with concern? +</p> + +<pb n='334'/><anchor id='Pg334'/> + +<p> +Much excitement was caused a few years ago by a pamphlet of an +Austrian professor. Another Austrian professor, of high rank in +science, criticized the pamphlet as <q>A reckless and absolute negation +of the foundation of the Christian dogma in the widest sense of the word, +proclaimed as the verdict of science and of common sense. It is replete +with blasphemous jokes, such as may usually be heard only in the most +vulgar places.</q> +</p> + +<p> +A cry of indignation was raised by the Catholic people of the Tyrol +against this base insult to their creed; it was shown that the author +of this pamphlet had misused his lectures on Catholic Canon Law, +to speak to his Catholic students disdainfully of the Divinity of Christ, +of the Sacraments, of the Church, and the prime foundations of +Christianity. Upon indictment by the public prosecutor, the pamphlet +was condemned in Court as a libel upon the Christian religion. +</p> + +<p> +It was expected that the representatives of science, in defence of +the threatened honour of science, would repudiate all community of +interest with a production that was merely the expression of an +anti-Christian propaganda. That expectation was not fulfilled; on the +contrary, those in authority at the Austrian universities, and numerous +professors of other countries, joined in a protest against the violation +of the rights of a professor, against the attacks on freedom of science. +They demanded full immunity for the author of the libel. Even the +state department of Religion and Education expressed the opinion that +the accused <q>had only availed himself of the right of free research.</q> +Is this the freedom in teaching that is to be protected by the state? +And yet there are those who indignantly deny that there is danger +for religion in this freedom! +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +He who really has at heart the honour of science and of +the universities, and is inspired by their ideals, should bear in +mind that to realize these ideals the first thing necessary is +public confidence: not the confidence of a revolutionizing +minority,—a scrutiny of those elements that give them their +plaudits ought to arouse reflection,—but the confidence of +earnest, conservative circles of the uncorrupted people. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In academic circles the increasing lack of respect for the university +and its teachers is complained of. Professor <hi rend='italic'>Von Amira</hi> writes: <q>Thirty +years ago the academic teacher was reverenced by the highest society; +his association was sought; he had no need of any other title than +the one that told what he was. To-day we see a different picture, +particularly as to the title 'professor.' To-day they smile at it. Nowadays, +if a professor desires to impress, he must bear a title designating +something else than what he really is. A literature has grown up that +deals with the decline of the universities. The fact of a decline is taken +for granted, only its causes and remedies are discussed. And this is +not all. Invectives are bestowed upon the institutions, upon the teachers +as a body, upon the individual teacher. And there is no one to take up +<pb n='335'/><anchor id='Pg335'/> +the cudgels in our defence!</q> A fact suggesting earnest self-examination, +and the resolution not to forfeit still more this respect. It is not +sufficient to repudiate with indignation the complaints. Nor will it do +to pretend a respect for religion and Christianity, and a desire to see +both preserved, that are not really felt. What is needed is the admission +that the road taken is the wrong one. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Responsibility before History.</head> + +<p> +The distressing fact is realized that the worm of immorality +is devouring in our day the marrow of the most civilized +nations. It is also known that its wretched victims are in no +class so numerous as in the class of college men. Earnest-minded +men and women are raising a warning cry, and are +forming societies to stem the ruin of the nations. The alarm +bell is ringing through the lands. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Remarkable words on this subject are those written not long ago +by <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>: <q>It looks as if all the demons had been let loose at this +moment to devastate the basis of the people's life. Those who know +Germany through reading only, through its comic weeklies, its plays, +its novels, the windows of its bookshops, the lectures delivered and +attended by male and female, must arrive at the opinion that the paramount +question to the German people just now is whether the restrictions +put on the free play of the sexual impulse by custom and +law are evil and should be abolished?</q> <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> puts the responsibility +for it upon the sophistry on the sexual instinct and the present naturalism +in the view of the world: <q>The prevailing naturalism in the view +of world and life is leading to astonishing aberrations of judgment, and +this is true also of men otherwise discerning. If man is nothing else but +a system of natural instincts, similar in this to the rest of living beings, +then, indeed, no one can tell what other purpose life could have than the +gratification of all instincts.... Reformation of ideas—this is the cry +heard in all streets; cast off a Christianity hostile to life, that is killing +in embryo thousands of possibilities for happiness. True, even in +past ages young people were not spared temptation. But the barriers +were stronger; traditional, moral, religious sentiment, and sensible +views. Our time has pulled down these barriers; young people everywhere +are advised by all the leading lights of the day: old morals and +religion are dead, slain by modern science; the old commandments +are the obsolete fetters of superstition. We know now their origin; +they are but auto-suggestions of common consciousness which mistakes +them for voices from another world, that has been deposed long since +by the scientific thought of to-day.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +These are words of indignation of a well-meaning friend +of mankind. Do they not rebound upon the speaker himself +<pb n='336'/><anchor id='Pg336'/> +to become terrible self-accusations for him and others, who, +while perhaps of similar well-meaning sentiment, are actually +working for the annihilation of the moral-religious sentiment, +as <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> himself has done by his books? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>The old religion is dead, slain by science,</q> is proclaimed in innumerable +passages of his books; the idea of another world has long +been disposed of by the scientific reasoning of the present time, <q>hence +a philosophy,</q> he tells us, <q>which insists upon the thesis that certain +natural processes make it necessary to assume a metaphysical principle, +or a supernatural agency, will always have science for an +irreconcilable opponent.</q> <q>It will be difficult for a future age +to understand,</q> he writes elsewhere, <q>how our times so complacently +could cling to a system of religious instruction originated many +centuries ago under entirely different conditions of intellectual life, +and which in many points forms the decided opposite to facts and +notions which, outside of the school, are taken by our times for +granted.</q> In respect to morals, too, one can do without a supernatural +law. <q>According to the view presented here, ethics as a science does +not depend on belief.... Moral laws are the natural laws of the +human-historical life of time and place.... Nor does it seem advisable +in pedagogical-practical respect to make the force or the significance of +ethical commands dependent on a matter so uncertain as the belief in +a future life.</q> We might cite many similar expressions from his +writings. +</p> + +<p> +It is significant that they have to condemn their own science in view +of its sad consequences. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> loudly demands <emph>restriction for the freedom of +art</emph>, for the industry of lewdness, for the literature of perversity. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +He says: <q>The English people, admired by us because of their liberal +principles and free institutions, are less afraid to show by the sternest +means the door to salacious minds ... the feeling of responsibility for +preserving the roots of the strength of the people's life is in England +far more wide awake than with us, who still feel in our bones the +fear of censure and the policeman's club.... But what are the things +committed by our nasty trades and the publications in their service +other than so many assaults upon our liberty? Are they not primarily +an assault upon the inner freedom of adolescent youth who are made +slaves of their lowest instincts by the industries of these merchants? +Therefore admonish the hangman not to be swerved by the plea of +freedom.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +No one will deny approval to these words. But do they not, +again, become a severe condemnation of the reckless freedom +<pb n='337'/><anchor id='Pg337'/> +in teaching, that claims the right to assault without hindrance +the truths which are the foundation of our nation? +If art must not become a danger, why may science? If the +artist is asked to take into consideration the innocence and +weal of young people, if he is cautioned not to follow solely +<q>his sense for beauty,</q> why should the teacher be allowed to +follow his <q>sense for truth</q> without regard for anything else? +If no statute of limitation and restriction exist for science, +neither prescribed nor prohibited ideas for the academic teacher, +why should there be any prohibited <q>æsthetic principles</q> +for the artist? Manifestly, because here the absurdity of +this freedom is more clearly perceptible, because it leads to +shamelessness. At this juncture, therefore, they are constrained +to concede the untenability and the senselessness of +the unlimited human freedom, that is defended with so much +volubility. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> points to an age in which, similarly to our times, progressive +men arose and, in the name of science, discarded religion and +morals; they called themselves men of science, sages, <q>sophists.</q> <q>It +is remarkable that the very same occurrence was observed more than +2,000 years ago, when <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> experienced it in his time with the young +people of Athens, who became fascinated by similar sophistical speech.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The noble Sage of Greece had caustic words for <hi rend='italic'>Protagoras</hi>, the +champion of sophistry, and his brethren in spirit: <q>If cobblers and +tailors were to put in worse condition the shoes and clothes they +receive for improving, this would soon be known and they would starve; +not so <hi rend='italic'>Protagoras</hi>, who is corrupting quietly the whole of Hellas, and +who has dismissed his disciples in a worse state than he received them, +and this for more than forty years.... Not <hi rend='italic'>Protagoras</hi> alone, but +many others did this before and after him. Did they knowingly deceive +and poison the youth or did they not realize what they were doing? +Are we to assume that these men, praised by many for their sagacity, +have done so in ignorance? No, they were not blind to their acts, but +blind were the young people who paid them for instruction, blind were +their parents who confided them to these sophists, blindest were the communities +that admitted them instead of turning them away.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +What a responsibility to co-operate in the intellectual corruption +of entire generations! And the corruption by dechristianizing +is increasing in all circles, owing to the misuse +of science. That the condition is not even worse is not the +merit of this science, nor evidence of the harmlessness of its +<pb n='338'/><anchor id='Pg338'/> +freedom; it is the merit of the after effect of a Christian past, +which continues to influence, consciously or unconsciously, the +thought and feeling even of those circles that seem to be long +since estranged from Christianity. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Concerning the decline of morality in our age <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> observes: +<q><hi rend='italic'>Foerster</hi> rightly emphasizes the fact that the old Church rendered +an imperishable service in moralizing and spiritualizing our life, by +urging first of all the discipline of the will, and by raising heroes of +self-denial in the persons of her Saints. That we still draw from this +patrimony I, too, do not doubt. <emph>That we waste it carelessly +is indeed the great danger.</emph></q> +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule:50%'/> + +<p> +<q>It was a wonderfully balmy evening in the fall of 1905,</q> relates +Rev. <hi rend='italic'>L. Ballet</hi>, missionary in Japan, <q>and the sun had just set behind +Mount Fiji. Unexpectedly a young Japanese appeared in front of me, +desiring to talk to me. I noticed that he was a young student. I +bade him enter, and we saluted each other with a low bow, as persons +meeting for the first time. I asked him to take a seat opposite to me, +and took advantage of the first moments of silence to take a good look +at him. But imagine my astonishment when his first question was, +<q>Do you believe life is worth living?</q> asked in an earnest but calm +manner. I confess this question from lips so young alarmed me and +went to my heart like a thrust. <q>Why, certainly,</q> was my reply, +<q>life is worth living, and living good. How do you come to ask a +question that sounds so strange from the lips of a young man? You +certainly do not desire to follow the example of your fellow-countryman +<hi rend='italic'>Fijimura Misao</hi>, who jumped into the abyss from Mount Kegon?</q>—<q>No, +sir, at least not yet. I confess, however, that I feel my hesitation +to be cowardice, for I have made this resolution for some time. In my +opinion man is purely a thing of blind accident, a wretched, ephemeral +fly without importance, without value. Why then prolong a life in +which a little pleasure is added to so much sorrow, so much disappointment; +a life that at any rate finally melts away into nothing? +I am more and more convinced that this is the truth.</q>—<q>And what +brought you to such views?</q>—<q>Well, science, philosophy, the books +which I have read for pastime or study. If it were only the opinion +of our few Japanese scientists one might hesitate; but the science, +the philosophy, of Europe, translated and expounded by our writers, +teach the same thing. God, soul, future life, all is idle delusion. +Nothing is eternal but only matter. After twenty, thirty, sixty years, +man dies, and there remains nothing of him but his body, which will +decay in order to pass into other beings, matter like he was. This +is what science teaches us; a hard doctrine, I confess; but what is +there to be said against it, considering the positive results of scientific +research?</q></q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Great responsibility is borne by a science that despoils mankind +of its best, of all that gives it comfort and support in +<pb n='339'/><anchor id='Pg339'/> +life! In faraway Japan there is not the spiritual power of +Christianity to counteract the misuse of science; the poison +does its work and there is no antidote. +</p> + +<p> +That the Christian nations <q>carelessly waste their patrimony, +that, indeed, is the great danger.</q> +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='340'/><anchor id='Pg340'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter II. Freedom Of Teaching And The State.</head> + +<p> +Close bonds of mutual dependence and solidarity interlink +all created beings, especially men. Insufficient in himself, +both physically and mentally, man finds in uniting with others +everything he needs; thus do individuals and families join forces, +generations join hands; what the fathers have earned is inherited +and increased by new generations. Human life is essentially +social life and co-operation—in the indefinite form social +life within the great human society, in the definite form social +life within the two great bodies, Church and state. Within both +bodies human benefits are to be attained and protected against +danger by common exertion—within the Church the spiritual +benefits of eternal character, within the state the temporal +benefits. +</p> + +<p> +Hence both bodies, or societies, will have to take a position in +relation to science and its doctrine. Indeed, in civilized nations +there is hardly a public activity of mightier influence upon life +than science. The contemplation of this position shall now be +our task. +</p> + +<p> +Science, as we have above set forth, addresses itself to +mankind—a fallible science addressing itself to men easily +deceived; therefore, an unrestricted freedom in teaching is +ethically inadmissible. Hence it follows, as a matter of +course, that the authorities of state and Church, who must +guard the common benefits, have the duty of keeping the freedom +in scientific teaching within its proper bounds, so far +as this lies in their power. Hitherto we have left these social +authorities out of consideration; the position taken was the +general ethical one. +</p> + +<p> +The case might be supposed that the Church had provided +few restrictions of this kind, and the state none at all; nevertheless, +<pb n='341'/><anchor id='Pg341'/> +an absolute freedom in teaching would still present a +condition dangerous to the community at large, contrary +to the demands of morality; we should then have an unrestricted +freedom in teaching, permitted by law, but ethically +inadmissible. +</p> + +<p> +The distinction is important. Quite often freedom in teaching +is spoken of as permitted by the state, as if it was identical +with ethical permission. If freedom in teaching is permitted by +the state, this evidently means only that the state permits teaching +without interference on its part; it says, I do not stand in +the way, I let things proceed. But this does not mean that it is +right and proper. The burden of personal responsibility rests +upon him who avails himself of a freedom which, though not +hindered by the state, is in conflict with what is right. The +state tolerates many things—it does not interfere against +unkindness, nor against extravagance, nor deceit; nevertheless +everybody is morally responsible for such doings. +</p> + +<p> +If, then, we take up the question, what position social authority +should take toward scientific teaching, whether it be in the +higher schools, or outside of them, we are considering chiefly +the state. It is the state that enters most into consideration +when freedom in teaching nowadays is discussed; the state +may interfere most effectively in the management of schools and +universities, for these are state institutions in most countries. +</p> + +<div> +<head>Universities as State Institutions.</head> + +<p> +They were not always state institutions. The universities +of the Middle Ages were autonomous corporations, which constituted +themselves, made their own statutes, had their own courts, +but enjoyed at the same time legal rights. Conditions gradually +changed after the Reformation. The power of princes began +more and more to interfere in the management of the universities, +until in the seventeenth century, and still more in the +eighteenth, the universities became state institutions, subject to +the reigning sovereign, the professors his salaried officials, and +text-books, subject and form of instruction were prescribed by +the minute, paternal directions of the sovereign, and with the +<pb n='342'/><anchor id='Pg342'/> +mania for regulating that was a feature of the eighteenth century. +The nineteenth century brought more liberty; it was +demanded by the enlarged scope of universities, which no longer +were only the training schools for the learned professions, but +became the home of research, needing freedom of movement. +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, universities are in many countries still state institutions. +They are founded by the state, are given organization +and laws by the state; the teachers are appointed and +given their commissions by the state. They are state officials, +though less under government supervision than other state officials. +At the same time these universities are possessed of a +certain measure of autonomy, a remainder of olden times. They +elect their academic authorities, which have some autonomy +and disciplinary jurisdiction. Likewise the separate faculties +have their powers; they confer degrees, administer their benefices, +and exert considerable influence in filling vacant chairs. +</p> + +<p> +The state then considers it its duty to grant freedom in +teaching. <q>Science and its teaching are free,</q> says the law in +some countries. No doubt a loosely drawn sentence; at any +rate, it means that science should be granted the <emph>proper</emph> freedom. +And this freedom it must have. We have become more +sensitive of unjustified paternal government than were the +people of the eighteenth century. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Object of the State.</head> + +<p> +What kind of a freedom in teaching, then, should be granted +by the state? Unlimited freedom? This is, at any rate, not +a necessary conclusion. The state must also grant freedom to +the father for the education of his children, to the landowner +for the culture of his fields, to the artist in the production +of his works; but that freedom would not be understood to be +an unlimited one, having no regard to the interests of society, +but merely as the exclusion of unwarranted interference. +Hence if the state, for reasons of the commonwealth, were to +restrict freedom of teaching, the restraint could not be considered +unjust. The purpose of the state must not suffer injury; +to attain this purpose the state has the right to demand, +<pb n='343'/><anchor id='Pg343'/> +and must demand, all that is necessary to the purpose in view, +even though it entails a restriction of somebody's freedom. +Now for a definition of this purpose of the state. +</p> + +<p> +Like any other society, the state seeks to attain a definite +object, so much the more because the state is necessary to +man, who otherwise would have to forego the things most +needed in life; and but for the public co-operation of the many +these could be attained not at all, or at least not sufficiently. +To provide these things is the object of the state, viz., the +public welfare of the citizens; it is to bring about public +conditions which will enable the citizens to attain their temporal +welfare. To this end the state must protect the rights +of its subjects, and must protect and promote the public goods +of economic life, but especially the spiritual benefits of morals +and religion. The state, through its legislative, judicial, and +executive functions, is to <emph>direct</emph> effectively the community to +this end; therefore it is incumbent upon the state to care for +the preservation and promotion of both material and spiritual +benefits, for the protection of private rights, and for the conditions +necessary to its own existence, even against the arbitrary +will of its subjects. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Protection for the Spiritual Foundations of Life.</head> + +<p> +From this the conclusion naturally follows, that the state +must not grant freedom to propound in public, by speech or +writing, theories that will <emph>endanger the religious and moral +goods of its citizens and the foundation of the state</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +We claim that the state neglects a solemn duty if it permits +without hindrance—we will not say, the ridicule and disparagement +of religion and morals: the less so, as freedom to ridicule +and to slander has nothing to do with freedom in teaching—but +the public promulgation of theories which are either +irreligious, or against morals, or against the state. Even though +they be done in scientific form, injuries to the common weal remain +injuries, and they do not change into something else by +being committed in scientific form. The state must seek to +prevent such injuries by strictly enforced penalties and by the +<pb n='344'/><anchor id='Pg344'/> +selection of conscientious teachers. The enforcement of the +principle may not be possible under circumstances, legislatures +may lack insight or good will, or the complexion of the state +may not admit of it for the time being, or permanently. Then +we would simply see a regrettable condition, a government incapable +of ridding itself of the morbid matter which is poisoning +its marrow. But if there is good will and energy, one thing +may always be done to check injurious influences, and that is +the awakening and employment of forces of opposition. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The University of Halle is said to have been the first one to enjoy +modern freedom in teaching. What, at that time, however, was meant +by freedom in teaching, is shown by the words of <hi rend='italic'>Chr. Thomasius</hi> in +1694: <q>Thank God that He has prompted His Anointed (the prince) +not to introduce here the yoke under which many are now and then languishing, +but gracefully to grant our teachers the freedom of doctrines +<emph>that are not against God and the state</emph>.</q> One hundred and fifty +years later Minister <hi rend='italic'>Eichhorn</hi> advised the University of Koenigsberg +that in natural sciences neither the individual freedom in teaching nor +of research are limited, that the case is different, however, with philosophy +as applied to life, with history, theology, and the science of laws. +<q>The first requisite there,</q> he said, <q>is a proper bent of mind, which, +however, can find its basis and its lasting support only in religion. With +the proper bent of mind there will be no desire to teach doctrines which +attack the roots of the very life of one's own country.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Now, what considerations make it plain that the duty of the +state is as stated? Two: consideration for its subjects, and +consideration for the state itself. The state must protect the +highest <emph>possessions of its citizens</emph>. For that reason men are +by nature itself prompted to found states, so as to protect better +their common goods, by the strong hand of an authority, against +foes from within and without, and to enable them to bequeath +those goods inviolate to their sons and grandsons. Hence they +must demand of state-power not to tolerate conditions which +would greatly jeopardize those goods, and certainly not to allow +attacks thereon by its own educational organs. The highest +spiritual benefits of civilization, and at the same time the +necessary foundations of a well-ordered life, are, first of all, +morality and religion; not morality alone, but also religion, +do not forget this. Man's first duty is the duty of worshipping +God, of recognizing and worshipping his Creator, the ultimate +<pb n='345'/><anchor id='Pg345'/> +end of all things. A profound truth was stated by <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, +when, coupling the duties to God with those to parents, +he said that those merit punishment who question the duty of +worshipping the gods and of loving one's parents. Hence the +first thing to be preserved to the nations is religion; it is in +many ways their most precious possession, too. Not only do all +nations possess religion, not excepting the most uncivilized; +but there is no power that influences life and stirs the heart +more than religion. Consider the religious wars of history; +while they were surely deplorable, they demonstrate what religion +is to man. Even in individuals who to all appearance are irreligious, +religion never fully dies out; it appears there in false +forms, or is their great puzzle, maybe the incubus of their lives, +giving them no rest. Only in conjunction with firm religious +principle can morality stand fast. Nowadays they work for +ethics without religion, for education and school without God. +Theoreticians in their four walls, removed from all real life, +are busily working out systems of this sort. This new ethics +has not yet stood the test of life, or, if it did, it has succeeded +in gaining for its adherents only those who are at odds with religion +and morals. These theories must first be otherwise attested +before they may replace the old, well-tried religious +foundations. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The noted and justly esteemed pedagogue, <hi rend='italic'>Fr. W. Foerster</hi>, writes: +<q>On the part of free-thinkers vigorous complaint has been made that +my book so decidedly confesses the unparalleled pedagogic strength of +the Christian religion. The author therefore repeats emphatically that +this confession has not grown out of an arbitrary metaphysical mood, but +directly out of his moral-pedagogic studies. For over ten years of a +long period of instructing the youth in ethics, he has been engaged exclusively +in studying psychologically the problem of character-forming, +and the result of his studies is his conviction that all attempts at educating +youth without religion are absolutely futile. And, in the judgment +of the author, the only reason why the notion that religion is +superfluous in education is prevalent in such large circles of modern +pedagogues, is, that they have no extensive practical experience in +character-training, nor made thorough and concentrated studies.</q> <q>The +fact is, that all education in which religion to all outward appearance is +dispensed with, is still deeply influenced by the after-effect of religious +sanction and religious earnestness. What education without religion +really means will become more clearly known in the coming generation.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='346'/><anchor id='Pg346'/> + +<p> +The state is zealous in protecting the property of its citizens, +to which end a powerful police apparatus is constantly +at work. If the state deems it its duty to interfere in this +matter, must it not consider it a still higher duty to protect +religion and morals, for the very reason that they are the property +of its citizens, and even their most precious? <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Pro aris et +focis</foreign>, for home and altar, was what was fought for by the old +Romans. Is it possible that a pagan government was more +sterling and high-minded than the Christian state of the +present? If it is to be the bearer of civilization, it ought to +consider that man liveth not by bread alone. The only true +mental civilization is the one which does not hamper but helps +man in attaining his eternal goal. +</p> + +<p> +Modern state power is being urged from all sides to take +measures against the corruption of morals by the novel +and the shop window, and not to look on apathetically when the +consuming fire is spreading all about, in the name of art. +Are the dangers to the spiritual health of society any less +if reformers, in the name of science, shake at the foundations +of matrimony, advocate polygamy, teach atheism? Because +a so-called reformer has lost the fundamental truths +of our moral-religious order, must all the rest submit to an +attack upon the sacred possessions of themselves and their +descendants? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +That the rights of the teacher are not unrestricted was set forth by an +American paper (<q>Science,</q> No. 321) in its comment upon the removal +of certain professors: <q>There are barriers set to them on the one hand +by the rights of the students, and by the rights of the college where +he teaches, on the other. The college must preserve its reputation and +its good name, the student must be protected against palpable errors +and waste of time.... If a professor of sociology should attack +the institution of matrimony, and propound the gospel of polygamy +and of free love, then neither the right to teach his views nor his +honesty of purpose would save him from dismissal. This is of course +a very extreme case, not likely to happen.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Is it so very extreme? Certainly not in regard to teaching by books. +Listen: <q>From the foregoing it is self-evident that polygyny based +upon the rivalry of men for women (analogous to the animal kingdom) +presents the natural sexual practice of mankind. Whether there is to be +preferred a simultaneous or a successive polygyny, or a combination of +both, would depend on varying conditions. The ethical type of the sexual +<pb n='347'/><anchor id='Pg347'/> +condition, viz., in general the desirable biological type, is the one +that would best suit a polygyny based upon a selection of man.</q> It is +taught further: <q>The monogamic principle of marriage in general is +only conditionally favorable to civilization, whereas it is destructive of +it constitutionally, hence in need of reform.</q> <q>Our contemporaneous +sexual reform wave has not yet assumed the position of this knowledge; +on the contrary, notwithstanding its revolutionary aspect in some particulars, +it is still under the ban of the traditional ideal of marriage</q>; +continence before marriage is an <q>absurd</q> proposition! +</p> + +<p> +This new system of morals, fit for the barnyard, but for women the +lowest degradation, is now to become the ideal of men, nay, even of +women: <q>True motherly pride, true womanly dignity, are incompatible +with the exclusiveness of the monogamic property principle. If our +movement for sexual reform is to elevate us instead of plunging us into +the mire, then this view must become part and parcel of our women.</q> +<q>The picture of the motherly woman, of the woman with the pride of +sexual modesty, instead of with the exciting desire of possession ... this +picture must become the ideal of men, and sink down to the bottom +of their soul and into the fibres of their nervous system; it must animate +their fancy and awaken their sensual passions.</q><note place='foot'>Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Chr. von Ehrenfels</hi>, Sexualethik. Similar passages might +be quoted from numerous other books by college-professors.</note> We stand right +in the midst of the world of beasts! +</p> + +<p> +This perilous moral teaching is allowed also in public lectures. +On November 14, 1908, the <q>Allgemeine Rundschau</q> wrote: <q>Imagine +a spacious concert-hall, brightly illuminated, every one of the many +seats occupied, the boxes filled to the last place, the aisles crowded, by +a most variegated audience: men and women, young maidens, youths +with downy beard; gentlemen of high rank with their ladies, faces +upon which are written a life of vast experience side by side with childish +faces whose innocence is betrayed by their looks, and on the platform +a university professor and physician, holding forth about the most intimate +relations of sexual life: the unfitness of celibacy, the Catholic +morals of matrimony, prostitution and prostitutes, the causes of adultery, +<q>sterile marriage,</q> onanism, and many kinds of perversities. The +man is, moreover, speaking in a fashion that makes one forget the admonishments +of conscience.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The city council of Lausanne, in its meeting of February 10, 1907, +prohibited <hi rend='italic'>Forel's</hi> lecture as an attack upon decency and public +morals, making reference in its resolution to <hi rend='italic'>Forel's</hi> ideas as laid down +in his book. In protest, <hi rend='italic'>Forel</hi> made a public statement, saying among +other things: <q>If the council desires to be logical it would have to +prohibit also the sale of my book.</q> We have no objection to make to +his conclusion. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We stated that religion is man's first duty. This applies not +only to the individual, but also—and this is forgotten too +often—to the state. Man, by his nature, and hence in all +<pb n='348'/><anchor id='Pg348'/> +forms of his life, including his citizenship, is obliged to have +religion. He remains in all conditions the creature which is +dependent upon God. And does not the state, too, owe special +duties of gratitude to God? It owes its origin to God: the impulse +to found states has been put into the human nature by +its Creator; the state owes to God the foundation of its authority: +in a thousand difficulties the state is thrown upon His help. +Therefore a public divine service is found with all peoples. +Does the state comply with this duty by silently supporting +a public atheism when it might do otherwise? by even becoming +its patron, when, posing as science, it ascends to the lecturing +desk to teach adolescing youth? +</p> + +<p> +Of course, free-thought is of a different opinion, especially +the one of to-day. Its principle is: the state need not trouble +itself about God and Religion, that is the private matter of each +individual. In the eyes of free-thought the state is an imaginary +being, hovering over the heads of its citizens; though they +may be religious, the state itself should have no Religion. What +absurdity! It is nothing short of nonsense to demand of the +members of a state, the overwhelming majority of whom hold +Religion to be true and necessary, that as a political community +they are to act as if their Religion were false and worthless, +as if to deny and to destroy it were quite proper. What +else is the state but an organized aggregation of its citizens? +To make of religious citizens, a state without Religion is just +as absurd as a Catholic state composed wholly and entirely of +Protestant citizens. This leads us to a further consideration. +The state must protect its own foundations. Just as it must +defend its existence against enemies from without, it must +protect itself against those enemies from within, who, whether +realizing the consequences or not, are by their actions actually +shaking its foundations. These foundations consist of proper +views on social and political principles, on morals and Religion. +If the state does not intend to abolish itself, it must not permit +doctrines to be disseminated which imperil these foundations +and, consequently, the peaceful continuance of the state. +In fact, no state power in its senses would permit a teacher, who +directly attacks the validity of the state order, to continue; it +<pb n='349'/><anchor id='Pg349'/> +would retire every professor of law who would dare to teach +that regicide is permissible, or who would with the oratory of a +Tolstoy preach the unnaturalness of a state possessing coercive +power. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +As a rule, open advocates of <emph>Socialism</emph> are kept out of college-chairs. +And rightly so. So long as the adherents of Socialism see in the state +but the product of the egotism of the ruling classes, and an institute +for subjugating the masses, and in the obtainment of political power +the means of doing away with this state of affairs, so long will it +be impossible for the state to trust the education of the future +citizen to a Socialist, nor can the latter, as an honest man, accept +a position of trust from the state, much less bind himself by the +oath of office to co-operate in the work of the state. Prof. <hi rend='italic'>C. Bornhak</hi> +makes the following comment: <q>The decisive point is not freedom +in teaching, but the circumstance that the Socialist professor takes +advantage of the respect connected with a state office, or of his position +at a state institution, to undermine the state. A state that would stand +for this would deserve nothing better than its abolition.</q> +</p> + +<p> +And <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi> similarly writes: <q>A state that would allow in the +lecture rooms of its colleges Socialistic views to be taught as the results +of science ... such a state will be looked for in vain.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Hence it is certain the state cannot grant a freedom in +teaching that would jeopardize the foundation of its existence. +It must consequently recognize no freedom which, in lectures +and publications, will seriously injure public morality and religion. +Morality and religion are, first of all, the indispensable +conditions for the continuance of the state. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> says the first duty of the state is to care for religion. +<hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> proposes heavy penalty for those who deny the existence of +the gods; a well-ordered state, he claims, must care first of all for +the fostering of religion. <hi rend='italic'>Plutarch</hi> calls religion the bond of every +society and the foundation of the law. <hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi> declares that there can +be neither loyalty nor justice without regard for God. <hi rend='italic'>Valerius Maximus</hi> +could say of Rome: <q>It has ever been the principle of our city to +give preference to religion before any other matter, even before the +highest and most glorious benefits.</q> <hi rend='italic'>Washington</hi>, in his speech to +Congress in 1789, declared religion and morality to be the most indispensable +support of the commonweal. He stated that it would be +in vain for one, who tries to wreck these two fundamental pillars of +the social structure, to boast of his patriotism. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Without religion there can be no firm resistance by conscience +against man's lower nature, no social virtues and sacrifices, +there can only be egotism, the foe of all social order. No +<pb n='350'/><anchor id='Pg350'/> +secure state-life can be built upon the principles that formed +the basis of the French Revolution. So we see, generally and +instinctively, the endeavour to prevent as much as possible anti-religious +doctrines from being expounded directly to the broad +masses of the people. This of itself is tantamount to the +acknowledgment of their danger to the state. Yet, millions have +tasted the fruit of an atheistic science, and the poison shows its +effect; they have shaken off the yoke of religion; in its place +dissatisfaction and bitterness are filling their breast, and fists +are clenched against the existing order. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>Bebel</hi> said in a speech in the German Reichstag, on September 16, +1878: <q>Gentlemen, you attack our views in respect to religion, because +they are atheistic and materialistic. I acknowledge them to be so.... +I firmly believe Socialism will ultimately lead to atheism. But these +atheistic doctrines, that now are causing so much pain and trouble for +you, by whom were they scientifically and philosophically demonstrated? +Was it by Socialists? Men like <hi rend='italic'>Edgar</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Bruno</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bauer</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Feuerbach</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>David Strauss</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Ernst Renan</hi>, were they Socialists? They were men of +science.... What is allowed to the one—why should it be forbidden +to the other?</q> +</p> + +<p> +The notorious anarchist <hi rend='italic'>Vaillant</hi> said: <q>I have demonstrated to the +physicians at Hotel-Dieu that my deed is the inexorable consequence of +my philosophy, and of the philosophy of <hi rend='italic'>Buechner</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, and <hi rend='italic'>Herbert +Spencer</hi>.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The youthful criminal <hi rend='italic'>Emil Herny</hi> read at his trial a memorandum +wherein he said among other things: <q>I am an anarchist since 1891. +Up to this time I was wont to esteem and even to idolize my country, +the family, the state, and property.... Socialism is not able to +change the present order. It upholds the principle of authority which, +all affirmations of so-called free-thinkers notwithstanding, is an obsolete +remnant of the belief in a higher power. I however was a materialist, +atheist. My scientific researches taught me gradually the work of +natural forces. I conceived that science had done away with the +hypothesis of <q>God,</q> which it needs no longer, hence that also the +religious-authoritative doctrine of morals, built upon it, as upon a false +foundation, had to disappear.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +What political wisdom would it be to honor as science any +doctrine that becomes a social danger the moment it is taken +seriously; what logic to denounce those as dangerous who +are putting into practice a science that is hailed as the bearer +of civilization! +</p> + +<p> +One may object: How is the state to determine whether +scientific doctrines are warranted or not warranted? The state +<pb n='351'/><anchor id='Pg351'/> +has the conviction that in its political offices it has no organs +for the cognition of scientific truth, for this reason it leaves +science to self-regulation. Only the scientist, it is said, is able +to revise the scientist. +</p> + +<p> +Nothing but scholarly conceit can engender such ideas. Then +any one would have the right to pin upon himself the badge of +the scientist and become thereby completely immune. Thus, +the bearers of practical political wisdom are declared incompetent +to recognize the chief foundation of their state-structure; +to realize, what daily experience and the experience of centuries +teaches, that disbelief in God, even if sailing under false colors, +undermines authority, that communism and upheaval of moral +conceptions are tantamount to social danger. They are directed +to depend for their information in such matters upon the latest +ideas of impractical scientists. The fact is, the matters at +issue have, with hardly an exception, long been decided. And +where the Christian faith is concerned, the Church and the +Christian centuries tell us clearly enough, what has hitherto +been understood by Christianity. If the objection here advanced +were true, then the state would not have a right to +decide in the matter of exhibiting immoral pictures in show +windows, without having argued the matter previously with representatives +of art. The state would not be allowed to pronounce +a death sentence because some scientists denounce capital punishment: +the state would have to expunge <q>guilt,</q> <q>expiation,</q> +and <q>liberty</q> from its penal code, because many recent scientists, +by rejecting the freedom of choice, have removed the dividing +line between crime and insanity, between punishment and +correction. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Protection for Christianity.</head> + +<p> +Hitherto we have, in respect to religion, considered chiefly +the rational truths, which are the foundations of every religion +and also common to non-Christian creeds; the existence of a +supermundane God and of a life after death are the most important +of them. The revealed Christian religion contains, +beside these truths, some others, which supplement them and surround +them like a living garland, viz., original sin, redemption, +<pb n='352'/><anchor id='Pg352'/> +resurrection, the divinity of Christ, grace and the Sacraments, +the existence of a Church with its God-given rights, indissolubility +of matrimony, etc. Should state-power protect the Christian +and Catholic religion by warding off attacks against it, +though such attacks are made in scientific form? This, too, in +a state in which perhaps other confessions are enjoying the freedom +of worship? +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It would seem superfluous to propose this question specifically. If, +according to the gist of our argument, religion is to be protected, +what other religion can be meant than the Christian religion? That +is the religion of our nations; none other is. While the stated distinction +may have more of an academic than a practical interest, the +discussion of this question will not be idle, if only for the reason that +it will shed even more light upon our previous statements. Besides, +there are manifest efforts to dislodge Christianity from the life of our +people, and with it all true religion, under the pretext of opposing +church-doctrines and dogmatism. The war against Christianity has not +since the days of a <hi rend='italic'>Celsus</hi> been waged as it is to-day. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +We premise a principle of a general nature. Of conflicting +religions and views of the world, only one can be true; this is +clear to every one who still believes in truth. It is equally clear +that this one truth only can have the right to come forward +and to enlist support in public life as a spiritual power; error +has no right to prevail against truth. Hence it will not do to +say simply: There are also the convictions of minorities in +the state; some claim that none of the existing religions is +the right one, others have dropped all belief in God; in our +times we wish to concede to any conviction the right to enter +into competition with others, provided mockery and abuse are +barred. These remarks are quite true, in the sense that neither +the individual nor the state may directly interfere with conscience +or prescribe opinions: leaving entirely aside the question +whether any one really could have a serious conviction of +atheism. The foregoing is true also in the sense that public +avowal of opinion must not be hindered by individuals. To +interpret this to mean that the state must grant freedom to +any expression of doctrine would be a grave misconception of +the social influence which false ideas are liable to exercise. Does +the state grant this freedom to any kind of medical practice, +<pb n='353'/><anchor id='Pg353'/> +whether exercised skilfully or awkwardly, conscientiously or +unscrupulously? +</p> + +<p> +Moral-religious error may in public life expect only <emph>tolerance</emph>—just +as many other evils must be tolerated, because +their prevention would cause greater evils to arise. +This is the reason why the state may, and often must, grant +freedom of worship even to false creeds, because its denial would +give rise to greater harm to the public weal (<hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas</hi>, 2, +2 q. 10, 11). Freedom of teaching, likewise, must not be +granted in the sense of acknowledging that false doctrines and +truth have equal rights; this would amount to an assassination +of truth. Freedom can be conceded to error for the one reason +only, that by not granting it there would be engendered greater +evils. Consequently, if a state-power, or the organs of its legislative +part, are convinced that the Christian religion is the only +true one, they cannot possibly concede to contrary doctrines the +right to pose as the truth and thus deceive minds; they may be +granted the same freedom in teaching only because restrictive +laws can either not be enforced at all, or not without creating +a disorder that would give rise to greater evils. Hence the +lesser evil must be carefully ascertained. +</p> + +<p> +With this general principle in mind, it is easily seen that a +freedom large enough to include an open attack on the fundamental, +rational, truths of religion and morals—this having +been our subject hitherto—could be conceded only if disbelief +and atheism had gained so much power as to make impossible +its prohibition. In this case, however, the state should be conscious +of the fact that it allows the undermining of its foundations. +If, in another state, religious feeling were at so low an +ebb, that the freedom of the Christian truth could not be obtained +in any other way than by granting full freedom for everything, +then even such unlimited freedom would be a good thing +to be striven for; of itself a deplorable condition and contrary +to God's intentions, but good as the lesser evil. +</p> + +<p> +But let us return to the revealed religion. In the eyes of +those who are convinced that the Christian religion, namely, +the Catholic religion, is the only true religion, the ideal condition +would be to have the entire population united in its +<pb n='354'/><anchor id='Pg354'/> +faithful confession; then matters would simplify themselves in +our case. But this ideal hardly exists anywhere. True, in many +countries the population is almost wholly Christian; but the +denominations are mixed, and many have separated at heart +from Christianity. What standards, then, should rule in this +case? +</p> + +<p> +Looking at it specially, the demand of ethical reason is no +doubt this: Nations and governments whose past was Christian, +whose institutions and civilization are still Christian, and +an overwhelming majority of whose members still think and believe +in a Christian way, would fail in their gravest duties if +they would expose or permit the Christian religion to remain +unprotected against the attacks and the attempts at destruction +by a false science, or by conceding to the adversaries of +Christianity equal rights or even preference. The Christian +religion will not be destroyed; but whole nations may lose it, +and its loss will in great measure be the fault of those in whose +hands their fate was laid. Here might be applied <hi rend='italic'>Napoleon's</hi> +well-known saying: <q>The weakness of the highest authority is +the greatest misfortune of the nations.</q> +</p> + +<p> +It remains an anomaly that a state, the members of which +for the most part are Christians, should treat this religion with +indifference, and tolerate that its tenets and traditions be +represented as fairy-tales and fables, its moral law as a danger to +civilization, and perhaps its divine Founder as a victim of religious +frenzy. If the state is the expression and the <emph>representative +of its subjects</emph>, then such disharmony between public +and private life is unnatural. Moreover, the Christian religion +is held by the majority of its citizens to be the most precious +legacy of their forefathers; they must demand from the state +<emph>protection for their greatest good</emph>. And this may be +claimed with even greater right by provinces where the population +almost unanimously clings to the creed of their ancestors; +at the colleges in these parts the faithful people will be entitled +to protection more than elsewhere against dangers to its inherited +religion. It would be unnatural in this case to apply the thoughtless +principle of dealing uniformly with all provinces of the state. +The state is not a heap of uniform pebbles, but an organism +<pb n='355'/><anchor id='Pg355'/> +composed of different parts, each desiring to retain its own +peculiar life. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Do not say this presumption does not admit of application to our conditions, +the majority of the people of this age being long since estranged +from Christianity. It is true, if we turn our eye only to the more conspicuous +classes of society, the classes that control the newspapers and +mould public opinion, this view might be admitted as to some countries. +But if we look at the masses, those not infected by half-education, then +this opinion is true no longer. And there are many who at heart are +not so distant from faith as it would seem. In public life they pose as +free-thinkers, but their domestic life bears frequently a Christian character. +And often they approach more and more the faith, the older they +grow. This is known to be the fact even of scientists. Instances are +men like <hi rend='italic'>Ampère</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Foucault</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Flourens</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hermite</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bion</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Biran</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Fechner</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Lotze</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Romanes</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Littré</hi>, and others. <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> claimed that no one who in +his youth disputed the existence of the gods retained this view to his +old age. <q>Christianity,</q> observes <hi rend='italic'>Savigny</hi> rightly, <q>is not only to be +acknowledged as a rule of life, it has actually transformed the world, +so that all our thoughts are ruled and penetrated by it, no matter how +foreign, even hostile, to Christianity they may appear.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is a sign how deeply Christian religion has sunk its roots +into the heart, that it remains <emph>the</emph> religion even for those who +have turned away from it. To be sure, for our nations Christianity +is <emph>the</emph> religion. For them the religion of a <hi rend='italic'>Confucius</hi> +or <hi rend='italic'>Zoroaster</hi> does not enter into consideration; nor any of the +products of modern religious foundations, which would replace +Christianity with substitutions of all kinds of religious +essences; they are on a level with the attempts at reconstructing +sexual ethics: both are regrettable delusions. <q>Improvement</q> +of Christian morality is tantamount to abandoning all morals, +and desertion from the Christian religion, amongst our people, +has always been apostasy from all religion. The Christian religion +is so true, that no one can renounce it inwardly and then +find peace in a self-made one. And all efforts aimed at displacing +Christianity lead only to an abandonment of all religion. +</p> + +<p> +Look at the number of people from whom slander and insinuation +have torn their old religion to be replaced by another—a +freer, higher religion; their moral decadence soon bears +testimony of the religious consecration which has been given +to them. Woe unto those authorities who, while able to oppose, +are indifferent, and who lend a hand in causing Christian thought +<pb n='356'/><anchor id='Pg356'/> +to withdraw more and more from our mental atmosphere, to be +replaced by another spirit, a spirit that will gradually control the +decision of the judge, the practice of the physician, the instruction +of the teacher, and thus more and more enter into the life +of the people. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It is not assured to those nations of Europe, whose public life is +feeding to-day upon the remnants of their Christian past, that they +will not relapse into a state of moral and religious barbarity. <q>Maybe +civilized mankind, or our nation at least, is really losing its hold more +and more upon definite moral standards,</q> so complains a modern pedagogue; +<q>possibly the emancipation of sensuality will increase without +end, perhaps we have passed forever the stage of true humanity and of +a live idealism, and we shall henceforth glide downward.... These are +no mere, feverish dreams; there is good reason for facing these possibilities +with a determined eye, and no accidental or philosophical optimism +can ignore them</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Münch</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +<q>It is quite possible,</q> we are told by another, <q>that much will go +down in our old Europe during the next centuries; and the downfall +will not be restricted by any means to Church and Christianity, +and in the crises that will come Europe will hardly get the needed +support from an æsthetic heathendom, from the Monists' Union, or +from the evidences of science</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Troeltsch</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +If it does not come to it, it will not be the merit of authorities +who let the vessel of state drift rudderless toward the rocks of +dechristianization. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +They do not realize that they greatly endanger thereby also +the foundations of the state. <emph>The foundations of our governments +rest upon Christianity.</emph> The Christian faith created +the state, created matrimony, family, and the education of +the youth; created the social virtues of loyalty and of obedience. +What we have of religion is Christian, what we +have of the religious support of morality is equally Christian; +<q>Christianity, Christian faith, Christian formation of life penetrates +all vital utterances of the Occidental world like an all-pervading +element</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +It is one of the first principles of political prudence not to +shake the foundations upon which the state rests. States +and nations are not ephemeral beings, existing from one day to +the other, they are historical structures measuring their lives +by centuries; past generations join hands with present generations, +deeds and customs of the fathers live on in their sons. +</p> + +<pb n='357'/><anchor id='Pg357'/> + +<p> +States must remain on the historical tracks on which they have +travelled to success, at least until the new track has stood the +test of reliability. So far anti-Christian philosophy has terribly +shaken governments; it has not yet proved itself a state-conserving +principle. +</p> + +<p> +It is a sad condition to see the guardians of states, devoid of +historical appreciation, allow their people to tear themselves +away from the soil wherein reposed the roots from which they +drew life and strength. Sad, too, that complaints are made of +college-professors who abuse freedom in teaching by constructing +an unproved contradiction between knowledge and faith, +by misrepresenting Christian tenets, by lowering the prestige +of the Church, by distorting her historical picture. It would +be regrettable for a Christian state, if the complaint were justified +that for the most part our colleges have become places where +religion is ignored; where the name of Jesus Christ, the Redeemer +of mankind, is no longer mentioned; where the name +of God never occurs in history, in natural and political science; +where religion is considered the most unessential factor of mental +life, a factor that has nothing to offer, that can answer no +question—a treatment which, by the force of suggestion, must +lead young men to think that religion is of no account. It is a +banishment which in its effect is little different from an attack +upon religion. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Sadder still would it be if the following view were to prevail at +our colleges: <q>A right of the student to see protected and not destroyed +any views and convictions, including those of a religious nature, +which he may bring to the university from his home surroundings, from +his preliminary education, as it is asserted time and again in the frequent +complaints about the dechristianizing of youth at the universities—does +not exist and cannot exist, because it would be in contradiction +to the very essence of the university and its tasks</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Jodl</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Is not this the ethical principle of the bird of prey? Is it not +allowed to guard the defenceless chick against the hawk? Christian +people send their sons to the university, and demand that the education +of the parental home be spared, that the inexperience of youth be +not misused. The state must demand that the religious-moral education +which it furthers in its public schools be not destroyed by the +higher schools. Yet, all these rights must be silenced the moment the +vision of the absolute freedom of teaching makes its appearance, since +to refrain from dechristianizing the youth would be contrary to his +tasks. +</p> + +</quote> + +<pb n='358'/><anchor id='Pg358'/> + +<p> +If such abuse in the management of the power of knowledge, +within and without colleges, is not counteracted by all possible +means, then none need be surprised when a science free from +religion and Christianity is followed by an elementary school +free from religion, when in public and preparatory schools the +free-thinking teacher is telling the pupils that there is no creation +but only evolution, and that the gospels and biblical history +are poetical stories such as the Nibelungenlied and the +Iliad and Odyssey. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +We cannot be astonished to find the following rules advocated for the +instruction in public schools: <q>Religious instruction in schools should +not differ from the instruction in other subjects, namely, one of full +freedom, bound only by recognized documents and personalities of +religious literature and religious science. The school must teach that +which is, it must present the tenets of all times and all nations +in so far as this is possible within its modest compass.... But +if the pupil should ask, What really is? What position should +the teacher assume toward this question? In my opinion, he should +speak in plain terms. He should say: There are people who believe +all that is taught by the different systems of religion.... The child +may further ask of the teacher whether he himself believes. No +teacher who claims the confidence of the children should shirk the +answer. He may confess his faith or disbelief, without need of worry. +It cannot hurt his prestige in the eyes of the child, because, if for no +other reason, either way he will find himself in an equally large and +good company</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Tews</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +But we hear much more radical utterances. For instance, the +official organ of teachers in a Catholic country urges defection from +the Church in the following words: <q>How long will Social-Democracy, +now so formidable, remain inactive against clerical arrogance? How +much longer will it shirk a duty that is clear to the dullest eye? If the +millions of our Social-Democrats, including the women and children, +would break away from Rome, the priestcraft in Austria is as good as +defeated. A grave responsibility rests upon the Social-Democratic +leaders. Should they miss the moment to act, they will be judged by +history!</q> (Deutsch-oesterreichische Lehrerzeitung, June 1, 1909). +</p> + +<p> +Another organ of teachers declares Christianity to be nothing else +but <emph>victorious heresy</emph>, for which Christ had to lay down His life +the same as <hi rend='italic'>Giordano</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hus</hi>, and countless others. <q>The subject of +religion as taught in the preparatory schools is for the most part +taken from ages whose customs and morals are—happily—no longer +ours.</q> We see radicalism rampant in large circles of public school +teachers, demanding noisily, excitedly, and, of course, in the name of +modern science and enlightenment, the abolition of the divine service, +of prayer, and religious instruction in school, giving as reason that, <q>as +to matters of mental freedom no difference should be made between a +<pb n='359'/><anchor id='Pg359'/> +university and a village school.</q> That our people will <q>carelessly +waste their Christian patrimony, this is the great danger.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Our argument is not that only Catholics should be professors, +nor even to limit the teaching office to Christians. But one +thing must be demanded of the college-teacher, that he possess +the pedagogic qualifications to render him competent of educating +the hope of the Christian people. As a rule this demands +a religious, Christian disposition. One thing the state must +absolutely demand of the teacher, that he have appreciation for +the foundations of the Christian state; he who has no understanding +for the historical forms of the life of a nation, who +even regards them with hostility, should remain away from +this vocation. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the Jesuit Order has five free universities, +founded and directed by the Order. Their professors +are not all Catholics; there are professors of other creeds, +even Jews. All work in harmony to the common end of the +university. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Men who sincerely and conscientiously strive for the interests of +science will everywhere show not only consideration, but even understanding +and respect, for what is true in the ideas of others. <q>I +gaze,</q> so writes Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Smolka</hi>, <q>upon the likenesses of my venerable +Protestant masters, under whom I studied at Göttingen. Thirty-seven +years have passed since I went to them, in full confidence to find in +their school the leaders who would be free from the influence of the +Catholic view of the world. To their profound knowledge I owe, first +of all, the emancipation from the prejudices I was raised in, from +the views of an atmosphere devoted to Indifferentism in which I had +passed my youth. Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Waitz</hi> opened my eyes to the grandeur of the +Catholic Church in the course of the centuries, in the repeated prostration +of the Papacy and its ever-following rise to unsuspected +heights, a fact unparalleled in the history of human institutions. Prof. +<hi rend='italic'>Lotze</hi> rebuked me at the very beginning of my studies at Göttingen +for a slighting remark about scholastic philosophy: later he imbued +me with profound respect for it and for the wealth of problems it +embraces. These scientists, Protestants without exception and in +exclusively Protestant surroundings, inoculated me with sincere love +for scientific truth, regardless of the consequences it would lead to. +They also introduced the youthful mind to the tried methods of scientific +research, indicating the boundaries where the domain of research +ends and the right of dogma, or arbitrary rule of subjective imagination, +begins.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<pb n='360'/><anchor id='Pg360'/> + +<div> +<head>Restriction of Right.</head> + +<p> +We need no further proof that the state is justified in restricting +the freedom of teaching, whenever demanded by the +business of the state as described above. Restriction of this +kind can be considered unjustified only by a state theory of +liberalism, which holds that the object of the state consists in +merely protecting individual liberty, no matter if this liberty +should lead to the gravest injuries so long as it does not affect +the freedom of others; a theory which changes the state community +from an integral organism into a conglomeration of +autonomous individuals. <hi rend='italic'>Lasalle</hi> scornfully termed this theory +the <q>nightwatchman idea</q> of the state. The state has the +right and the duty to exert a necessary influence upon the pursuit +of science, especially at the universities. Against it the +pleading of <emph>autonomy of the college</emph> and its teacher will not +hold. They have a certain autonomy, that was even greater +in former times. An important part of it is the right to propose +appointments for vacant chairs. It must be admitted that +this method of appointment is proper; it vouches for the scientific +fitness of the appointee, and will prove a protection against +the exercise of undue political influence and ministerial absolutism, +provided that this method is impartially exercised. But +an autonomy that disputes the right of the state to protect its +interests, where free science conflicts with it, that would demand, +as has been asserted, that <q>no infringement of the freedom +in teaching must be deduced from the official position as +teacher,</q>—such autonomy would be a palpable misconception of +the dependency of the college-teacher and of the social service of +science. The rules that apply to other, non-judicial, officers +should apply to teachers appointed by the state, and offences in +their office, or conduct injurious to the purpose and the dignity +of their office, should be treated similarly as in the case of other +public servants. Nor should members of the legislature be forbidden +to defend the rightful interests of their constituents in +regard to schools. They are elected by the people for this purpose, +and the people have a claim on the schools, which are supported +<pb n='361'/><anchor id='Pg361'/> +by their taxes and to which some of their greatest interests +are attached. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It has been demanded to concede to college-teachers the independence +and immunity of judges. This, however, would be overlooking +the vast difference between professors and judges. The judge has +to render legal decisions in concrete cases, according to existing laws; +in order to lessen the danger of his being guided by outside considerations +he is given a large measure of independence. But what questions +has the college-professor to decide? Mathematical or physical +questions? There his incorruptibility is not in such danger that he +must be made independent of government. Religious and moral questions, +questions of views of the world? These he is not compelled to +decide. Neither state nor people have appointed him to question, time +and again, the fundamental foundations of human life, and to render +decisions which nobody requested. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +It is not clear why science, pleading its independence, should +oppose justified restrictions. As a matter of fact <emph>this independence +does not exist anywhere</emph>. Numerous are the +considerations, often unwarranted, it is actually tied to, yea, often +tied to by its own hands. He who is familiar with scientific +doings, especially academic doings, knows numbers of such ties—there +is the professional opinion in scientific circles; woe unto him +who in his scientific works dares to confess a supernatural view +of the world!—ties of the predominance of certain leaders or +schools, without or against whose favor it is difficult to attain +recognition, approval, or position; the ties of parties and cliques +in an academic career; the tie, too, of that insinuating power +of the state that confers much-desired decorations and titles. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +<q>Where is this freedom of science?</q> asks a modern academic teacher. +<q>Some will say science and its teaching are free in our country. True, +it is so written on paper. But those charged with keeping this principle +inviolate are human. For instance the monists have the chief +voice in appointments to zoölogical chairs. They will propose only scientists +who are not opponents to the monistic faith. Far be it from +me to assume any <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>mala fides</foreign>. They simply believe that only their faith +is the proper one to promote science. But I ask again, where is the +freedom of science?</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Dahl</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>H. St. Chamberlain</hi> tells of an amusing incident in his life: <q>Many +years ago, when I desired to devote myself to an academic career, a +chemist said to me: <q>My dear fellow, since you belong to the profession, +I tell you as a friend that it is not enough for you to be proficient: +you should try, first of all, to marry the daughter of one of the professors, +<pb n='362'/><anchor id='Pg362'/> +of a privy counsellor if possible.</q> <q>This advice comes too late,</q> +I replied, <q>I am already married.</q> My well-wisher was visibly shocked. +<q>What a pity! Too bad! You don't realize what an influence this has +here upon one's career.</q> What trouble I had to obtain even the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>venia +docendi</foreign>! and then I stuck fast and could not budge despite all achievements +until I undertook to marry the daughter of one of the <q>head-wirepullers</q>; +then things were fixed within three months. I may have +looked at him in a peculiar way, for his wife was a veritable Xanthippe, +and, he added with a laugh: <q>You know I am all day at the laboratory, +from morning until late at night.</q></q> There is nothing new under the +sun. In the year of grace, 1720, <hi rend='italic'>Johann Jacob Moser</hi> started his lectures +in Tuebingen, but could get no audience. <q>No wonder, even a +cleverer man than I would not have fared better at that time, when +everything depended on nepotism.</q> The young man had crossed Chancellor +<hi rend='italic'>Pfaff</hi> by rejecting a marriage arrangement (<hi rend='italic'>Horn</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +One will find these things very human. Moreover, it would be unwarranted +to assume that they happen always and everywhere. But +they prove that the pursuit of science rests also on general human +grounds, and does not always remain aloft, in the ethereal heights of +pure truth. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Freedom of Teaching in History.</head> + +<p> +When we said that it is the duty of the state to protect the +common benefits of life against injury by freedom in teaching, +and to stand guard over its Christian past, we stated nothing +but what has been the conviction of the Christian nations and +their rulers up into the nineteenth century. Absolute freedom +in teaching cannot plead the support of history, it is only of +yesterday. History shows it to be the natural child, not +of the first awakening of the consciousness of freedom, but +of <emph>the de-Christianizing of the modern state</emph>. Its official +entry coincides with the increasing de-christianizing of +public life during the nineteenth century, after the modern +state adopted more and more the principles of liberal thought. +A naturalistic view of the world, without faith, was struggling +for supremacy; science had to proclaim it as higher enlightenment, +and vehemently urged freedom in its behalf. The +state receded step by step, confused by the commanding note +in the new demands, by high-sounding words about the rights +of science; it allowed itself to be talked into the belief that it +must become the leader in the new course, and it took the banner +that was forced into its hands. It has always been so; claims +<pb n='363'/><anchor id='Pg363'/> +presented with impudence will intimidate, and assume in the +eyes of many the appearance of right. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In so far as it signifies the removal of the religious-moral bars in +teaching, the freedom in teaching developed first in Protestant Germany, +together with the increasing change of universities into state +institutions. Reformation and the ensuing <emph>Enlightenment</emph> had gradually +prepared the way for it. Neither the rationalism nor the pietism +of the eighteenth century could have an understanding for the +tenets of the faith. In addition there was the confusion engendered by +the multiplication of Protestant denominations, none supported by an +overtowering spiritual authority; it led more and more to the +parting between science and religious confession; political reasons, +too, made it desirable to disregard confessions. Thus the severance +of science from religion increased and the <q>freedom of teaching</q> in this +sense was finally adopted also by Catholic states as an achievement. +</p> + +<p> +The enlightenment that had developed outside of the universities +made its entry into the halls of universities chiefly under the Prussian +Minister <hi rend='italic'>von Zedlitz</hi>, a champion of enlightenment and a friend of +the philosophers <hi rend='italic'>Wolff</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi>. That the universities at that +time were controlled by free-thinkers is illustrated by a saying of +<hi rend='italic'>Frederick II.</hi> On January 4, 1774, <hi rend='italic'>von Zedlitz</hi> asked of the king +whether <hi rend='italic'>Steinhauss</hi>, M.D., should be denied the appointment for professor +extraordinary at Frankfort-on-the-Oder, for the reason that he +was a Catholic. The king decreed in his own handwriting that <q>This +does not matter if he is clever; besides, doctors know too much to have +belief</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Bornhak</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +In the year of the Revolution, 1848, freedom of teaching became a +political catch-word. <q>The terms freedom of teaching and freedom of +learning, that became popular in 1848, when any phrase compounded +with freedom could not be often enough repeated, have been ever since +reminiscent of barricades, and men who have witnessed those times become +nervous at their mere sound</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Billroth</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +What was understood by freedom in teaching at the turning point +of the eighteenth century is shown by the demand of <hi rend='italic'>Thomasius</hi> for +<q>freedom of doctrines that are not against God and the state.</q> The +first move was to break away from <emph>human</emph> authorities, <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> and +others. Thus the Kiel University, by its regulation of January 27, 1707, +ordered that <q>no faculty should enslave itself to certain principles or +opinions, in so far as they are dependent on a human authority</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Horn</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +In Göttingen and Halle freedom of teaching also became the maxim, +and <q><foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Libertas sentiendi</foreign>,</q> as <hi rend='italic'>Münchhausen</hi> declared, <q>was open to every +one and not restrained by statute, except that there should be taught +nothing <emph>ungodly</emph> and <emph>Unchristian</emph>.</q> In those days this restriction +was looked upon as a matter of course. It is known that <hi rend='italic'>Kant</hi> +was disciplined by Minister <hi rend='italic'>Woellner</hi> in 1794, because of his treatise on +religion; at Koenigsberg this reproof was accepted with good grace, +and both the philosophical and the theological faculties pledged themselves +not to lecture on <hi rend='italic'>Kant's</hi> religious philosophy. As recently as the +<pb n='364'/><anchor id='Pg364'/> +middle of the nineteenth century a restriction in this sense was ordered +by the Prussian Minister <hi rend='italic'>Eichhorn</hi>, and the restriction was observed. +The Materialist <hi rend='italic'>Moleschott</hi> was cautioned in 1845 by the Senate of Heidelberg +University, and in reply he resigned his post; in the following +year at Tübingen <hi rend='italic'>Büchner's venia legendi</hi> was cancelled, because, as +he himself stated, <q>it was feared I would poison with my teaching +the minds of my young students</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Horn</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +In 1842, <hi rend='italic'>Bruno Bauer</hi>, the radical Bible-critic, was removed by the +Prussian faculties from the academic chair because of his writings. +<hi rend='italic'>D. Strauss</hi> lectured on philosophy at Tübingen, but was forced to resign +when the first volume of his <q>Life of Jesus</q> appeared in 1835. +Later on, when called by the authorities of Zurich to the chair for +Church history and dogmatics, an emphatic protest of the people made +the appointment impossible. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +While showing a regrettable indifference for attacks against +religion, the modern states, inoculated with the principles of +Liberalism, have not entirely forgotten their traditions. Many +sections in their penal codes still protect religion, not only +against defamation, but, as is the case in Austria, also against +public anti-Christian propaganda, and the <q>religious-moral education</q> +in public schools is made compulsory by law. Of course +there is a contradiction, between the conviction of the state that +the principles of morals and religion must be preserved, and the +grant of full freedom to an anti-religious misuse of science, +whose effect upon the masses is unavoidable. It is a contradiction +to tear down the dam at the river and then erect emergency +levees against the onrushing flood. The amazing presumption, +that holds inviolate and sacred everything that poses +under the name of science, is the fault of it all. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Freedom of Teaching and Party Rule.</head> + +<p> +In some countries the complaint is heard that a certain +faction has obtained control of the universities, and so exercises +its control that those who are not of its bent of mind are +excluded from both teaching and taking part in the administration +of its affairs, despite the fact that freedom in teaching +and learning has been guaranteed by the state. It is the +faction that professes free-thought and cultivates the freedom +of science in this sense. This condition forces students faithful +<pb n='365'/><anchor id='Pg365'/> +to their religion to study in a strange atmosphere, and they +are looked upon as strangers. The parties so accused seek to +disclaim these charges as unjust; for they feel that, if justified, +it would disclose an unlawful condition of things. Nevertheless +the facts are so notorious, that all protestations will be without +avail. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +These facts must be painful to the sense of justice, order, and +good-fellowship; and to this sense it is not pleasing to deal further with +matters which have often been the cause for indignant resentment, and +to go into concrete details. We shall but briefly recall to mind how +persistently candidates for academic positions are pushed aside when +they are known to be of staunch Catholic mind. This is borne out by +their trifling percentage among the large number of college-teachers; +by the high pressure that is often needed to lift the embargo for a +<emph>Catholic</emph>; by assaults which not seldom resulted in physical violence. +This small number is glaringly emphasized by the considerable, even +disquieting, number of college lecturers of Jewish extraction. Furthermore, +there is the improper usage that the theological faculty is passed +over at the annual election of the rector, and likewise, that teachers +even of lay-faculties are excluded from academic offices when they profess +themselves openly as Catholics. +</p> + +<p> +Catholic students have seen themselves treated as strangers at more +than one university; they were not given the usual privileges, and were +accorded rights only in the proportion that their number had to be +reckoned with. Their corporate bodies were ignored, self-evident rights +either denied or grossly violated. +</p> + +<p> +As to the small number of religious-minded lecturers at colleges +it is not to be denied that the number of those who combine fervent +religious persuasion with high scientific efficacy is not considerable +these days. Their long suppression furnishes a reason for it, but not +the only one. A modern university professor rightly states: <q>While +there never has been a want of courageous, determined confessors of +the Catholic faith who have occupied a prominent, even leading, position +in the progress of science, in the perfection of methods and means of scientific +research, they were and still are the exception. They were men +of <emph>self-reliance and independent</emph> judgment, who were able to exempt +themselves from an humble submission to the powerful view of the +world, which emanates from the hatred of Christianity and prevails in +educated circles. The issue is still the same secular contrast between +the two views of the world, which <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> illustrated with unsurpassed +mastery as long as fifteen hundred years ago. But the view of +the world which has been in the ascendant in scientific circles long since, +has certainly nothing in common with scientific research.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Our task, however, is not to examine the facts, but to prove +that such conditions are unlawful, no matter where and +<pb n='366'/><anchor id='Pg366'/> +when found. We do not wish to discuss further the fact that +a university polity, exclusively in the spirit of a liberalism that +gradually goes over into radicalism, would constitute a grave +danger for Christian traditions. Indifference to the Christian +and every other religion, or to an extent direct rejection, +must make it appear more and more inferior and obsolete +in the eyes of educated circles; this view will then easily +find its way to the people. Nor do we intend to enlarge +upon a second point, viz., the interest of science itself. The +kernel of liberal research in the province of the spiritual is +a frivolous agnosticism, with a rigid bondage to its naturalistic +postulates, with which we have become sufficiently acquainted. +Principles of this kind are poison for true science. For this +reason alone it is necessary that a Christian philosophy be +placed by the side of a philosophy in fear of metaphysics, one +that never extends beyond puzzles and problems; that a history +guided by Christian principles be placed alongside of one inspired +by anti-ecclesiastical sentiment; in general that a spirit of +veracity assert itself, which would give an example, from the +home of highest culture, not of vain arrogance, but of that mental +firmness which, conscious of the limits of human knowledge, +is also ready to believe. How can our universities remain the +seats of sterling mental life, if the highest power of truth that +has ever been, the Christian religion, is ignored there, and even +maligned; and if in its stead is cultivated a philosophical-religious +research which leads only to the negation of everything +that hitherto was our ideal, and which gives birth to a mental +anarchy, which, before the forum of history, makes it a principle +of pauperization. +</p> + +<p> +One point to be particularly emphasized is the <emph>violation +of rights and the oppression of mental liberty</emph>, resulting +from a party-rule in the realm of higher education. Under +a government of law every one, assuming he possesses the +necessary qualification, has an equal right to teach: this is elemental +to freedom of teaching. The state with its institutions +exists for the benefit of all classes, not for one certain class that +has formed the notion that it is the sole bearer of science. +Enemies of the state should be excluded from teaching, but not +<pb n='367'/><anchor id='Pg367'/> +good citizens. Nor can it be demanded, as a necessary preliminary +for academic teaching, that one must subscribe to the +catch-phrases of any particular party, and so discard one's religious +belief. And there is the violation of the rights of faithful +Christian people. Since their money in the form of taxes maintains +to a large extent the schools and their teachers, they surely +can demand a conscientious administration of their interests, +and a representation of the Christian view of the world, in a +way becoming its past and its dignity; Christian people can +demand that their sons receive an education in consonance +with their Christian convictions, and that the universities will +train officials, physicians, and teachers, in whom they may have +confidence. If there are no other but state universities in a +country, and these are monopolized by a free-thought party, then +a condition of mental bondage will arise for those of a different +mind. They are compelled either to have their sons forego +the learned profession, or else expose them to an atmosphere +wherein they see danger of a religious and moral nature, in ideas, +association, and example. No right is left to them, but the right +to pay taxes toward the budget of education, and then to look +on how an irreligious party is striving to turn the higher schools +into training camps of obligatory liberalism, and to monopolize +the entire mental life for this purpose. Now and then there +is great indignation against state monopolies; it is said, shall +the state determine what kind of cigars I should smoke, and +what I am to pay for them! Now, then, where is freedom if +the majority of the Christian population is to be forced into +taking mental nourishment it does not desire and rejects, and +pay for it besides? If we recall to mind the past, which gave +birth to the most venerable universities of the present, a sorrowful +feeling comes over us. We see how far our colleges have +deviated from their original purpose, how our governments have +lost their old traditions. Promotion of the Christian religion +and of the fear of God, was the lofty aim which their founders +had in mind. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +In bestowing the charter upon Vienna University, Duke <hi rend='italic'>Albrecht</hi> +stated that he beheld in the university an institution <q>whereby the +glory of the Creator in heaven and His true faith on earth would be +<pb n='368'/><anchor id='Pg368'/> +furthered, knowledge would be increased, the state benefited, and the +light of justice and truth brightened.</q> And when, in 1366, he donated +property to the university, he declared the object of the donation to be +<q>that the university may increase the prosperity of the entire Church.</q> +</p> + +<p> +When Leopold I, on April 26, 1677, signed the charter of Innsbruck +University he declared that he founded this university pre-eminently +for the protection and prosperity of the Catholic Religion, as a means +for its preservation, and also that many of those who had lost the +faith might be led back to religion, for the honour and the glory of the +Tyrol. +</p> + +<p> +In the charter of Tübingen University, <hi rend='italic'>Eberhard</hi> of Württemberg +states: <q>I believe I can do no better work, none more helpful to +gain salvation, none more pleasing to the eternal God, than to provide +with special diligence and emulation for the instruction of good +and zealous young men in the fine arts and sciences, to enable them +to recognize God, to know, to honour, and to serve Him alone.</q> <q>In +those days there was no hesitation to assign to science the loftiest vocation +and to declare ... that, coming from God, science should also lead +back to Him as its origin.... The school was charged to work for the +spread and the defence of the true belief. Christian truth was once +queen at these universities; now, she has only too often become a +stranger, to be denounced at times if she attempts to knock at the +portals of her old home</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Probst</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Free Universities.</head> + +<p> +Another manner, to provide proper freedom of teaching, +is open to the modern state by incorporating free universities. +Unlike the state institutions, they are not directly controlled +by the state, but are independent of it in their internal +affairs; they are founded and managed by private persons or +societies. Universities of this kind are found in Belgium and +in England, to some extent in France, but their home is chiefly +in the United States. At the head of the free university of the +United States is the president, with a governing body and a +board of trustees elected from members of the university; they +appoint teachers, prescribe schedules of study and examinations, +and conduct its business. True, the state cannot relinquish its +right to oppose a system of teaching dangerous to the common +weal; it will also provide that those to be licensed to practice +the professions possess the necessary education and training; +but the state refrains from further interference in the management +of free universities. +</p> + +<p> +It is no doubt difficult to establish by private means universities +<pb n='369'/><anchor id='Pg369'/> +equally efficient with those of the state; in the countries +of Middle Europe this undertaking is perhaps more difficult than +elsewhere, but the possibility is there, and it is even realized +in some places. This, however, is not a question to occupy us +here; we merely wish to declare, if similar foundations are +about to be undertaken, and the necessary conditions are +present, then the state must not prevent them, it must grant +freedom in teaching. +</p> + +<p> +True, the state is obliged to assist its subjects in acquiring +material and spiritual goods, but only in so far as private means +are insufficient thereto: the state must only act in a supplemental +way. If it does that which its citizens themselves are +able to do, then the state is needlessly abridging their free +right. This includes the establishment of schools and the teaching +in them. Presuming fitness, everybody has a <emph>natural +right</emph> to teach others; hence, also, to found schools, whether +by himself or jointly with others. Furthermore, instruction +is a part of education, even at the university; it could +hardly be said of the graduate of the preparatory school +that his education is completed. Education, however, is a +matter for the parents. Their rights would be infringed upon, +if needlessly forced by the state to intrust their sons exclusively +to the state colleges and to their method of teaching. +How could the state's exclusive right to teach be proved? +Does the pursuit of science belong to its domain? No one will +care to claim this. If science were to be allotted to the jurisdiction +of any one body, the Church would be the first to enter +into consideration, because of her international and spiritual +character. Or is this right to be conceded to the state because +it is to be the bearer of culture? The state is to promote culture, +but not to prescribe a certain brand of it. The argument +that private universities cannot be founded and conducted in +the proper way is certainly not borne out by the facts. +</p> + +<p> +Even if the state, owing to its superior facilities, could provide +better universities than private effort, it would not be entitled +to the monopoly; the fact of being able to do something +better does not secure the sole privilege of doing it. Moreover, +in order to attract students, free universities will have to +<pb n='370'/><anchor id='Pg370'/> +emulate state universities. The right of the state to found +universities will of course not be disputed; but this right must +not deteriorate into a disguised monopoly, that would grant +privileges to its own universities, and deny them to free +universities in order to put them out of existence. At any rate, +the state will always retain considerable influence over the +studies at free universities. It may require certain standards in +candidates for political and professional positions, for judges +and lawyers, teachers at state schools, physicians; it may +insist upon state examinations, or it may make its stipulations +for recognizing the examinations and academic degrees of the +free schools. +</p> + +<p> +By free schools of higher learning, a greater degree of freedom +in teaching and in learning would be assured, or, speaking +generally, a greater freedom in the intellectual life. If these +higher institutions of learning are exclusively in the hands of +the state, it cannot fail that the higher intellectual life will +be dangerously dependent upon the state, or fall into the control +of a dominating clique. As an example might be cited the +restrictions placed upon jurisprudence by Prussia in the eighteenth +century; the long-continued control of Hegelian philosophy; +the Université Impériale of Napoleon; the predominance +of anti-Catholic thought in our own schools. Universities, +founded upon a positive, Christian basis, would surely be a +comfort for thousands. +</p> + +<p> +No need to say that such foundations may also be undertaken +by the Church. This right cannot be denied to the Church, +just as little as to any other corporation. Nay, much less! Because +of its intellectual and international character science is +most closely related to the Church. The latter, furthermore, has +an eminent, historical right; no one has done more for the +foundation and promotion of the European universities than +the Church. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +A remarkable and at the same time <emph>characteristic attitude</emph> towards +free, particularly Catholic, universities is assumed by Liberalism. The +stereotyped objection to Catholic universities is known; it can be reduced +to this formula: At a Catholic university there can be no freedom +in research nor freedom in teaching; but without them there can be no +science; consequently, a Catholic university is a contradiction. It is +<pb n='371'/><anchor id='Pg371'/> +the same old song: there is but one science, there is but one freedom—the +free-thought that rejects belief. If it is really so obvious that +a Catholic university is a contradiction to science, hence incapable to +foster it, why the excitement? Either such universities are incompetent, +or they are not. Let the experiment go on; the result will tell. +If the result is certain, as is claimed, very well, one may serenely await +it. Liberalism shows itself again here in the shape of that nasty hybrid +of freedom and intolerance for which it is known. It is the head of +Janus with its two faces: the one showing the bright mien of freedom, +the other the sinister scowl of an intolerant tyrant. They shout +for freedom, freedom they demand; Church and Revelation are put +under the ban, because they restrain freedom. The state is denounced +as soon as it wants to interfere. But if others attempt research free +and independently, though not just so as Liberalism would like, then +tyranny immediately takes the place of liberty, the herald of freedom +resorts to oppression, and those who just now proclaimed the independence +of universities from the state, who protested against the interference +of the state in science, turn about and loudly call for the help of +the state, avowing that science can thrive only under state control. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Church and the Universities.</head> + +<p> +In discussing the position of the social authorities toward +freedom of teaching, we have chiefly considered the state. Of +the Church we shall say but a brief word. It will suffice to +recall what has been said previously; what has been stated +about the relation of the Church to freedom of research, applies +in many respects equally to freedom of teaching. Little will +have to be added. The Church, and the Church alone, has +received from her divine Founder the command to preserve the +doctrine of revelation and to proclaim it to mankind. <q>Going, +therefore, teach ye all nations</q>—this is the commission of +the Lord. +</p> + +<p> +For this reason the teaching of the revealed truth, Theology, +is the privilege of the Church. But the rest of the sciences +will not be exempt from the obligation to listen to the admonition +of the God-appointed authority, in all cases where +religious grounds are invaded. To the Church is intrusted the +religious-moral guidance of her faithful; she cannot remain indifferent, +when in the public teaching of science a system is +followed detrimental to the Christian principles of the faithful. +And whoever has entered the Church by baptism, remains subject +to her authority in all matters within her sphere. +</p> + +<pb n='372'/><anchor id='Pg372'/> + +<p> +The state must acknowledge these rights of the Church, or +else forfeit its claim to be a Christian state; these rights, belonging +to the essence of the Christian religion, are guaranteed +by God, and are independent of human sanction. Hence, in +case of clashes in this respect, the state must listen to the +grievances of the Church; this will chiefly concern Theology, +rarely other sciences. Thus it would be partially correct to say +that the theological faculties are subject to the Church, but those +of the rest of the sciences to the power of the state. But only +partially; spiritual interests cannot be marked out by faculties. +Interests of faith may be also violated in other faculties: +then cases may arise which lose their purely worldly character, +and extend into the religious sphere of the Church. If a professor +should lecture on a matter touching closely upon interests +of faith, for instance, Catholic Canon law or philosophy, and +should show bias against Church and Christianity, deny its +authority, distort and attack its tenets—then this would constitute +an evident wrong to the Church and a flagrant violation +of the interests which to guard it is her duty, especially in a +country overwhelmingly Catholic. In that case the Church +would be entitled to make expostulation. +</p> + +<p> +In rejecting the protests of the Church in such cases, as +being the interference of a foreign power, the state would +thereby prove that it misunderstands both, the religious vocation +of the Church and the proper relation between state and Church. +For the faithful, whom the state calls its subject, are also +the subjects of the Church, they are the lambs and sheep the +Church is to feed, in obedience to divine command. Church +and state having in common the same subjects, and being closely +connected for so long a time that it has become historical, it +would be unnatural if they were to treat each other as strangers, +such as might be expected in a heathen country, Japan, for +instance. The nature of the case and the weal of the people +demand harmonious action in such matters. It cannot be +denied, moreover, that the Church commonly meets the state +government to the extreme limit of her ability. About the +divine rights of the Church opinions differ, but those able to +fully appreciate the precious benefits of religion and morality +<pb n='373'/><anchor id='Pg373'/> +will regard it as one of the greatest boons to humanity, that +there exists within its fold an organization which protects with +fearless, awe-inspiring majesty these benefits against all attacks, +even against the state and its all-devouring policy of utility, +and in this way defends the mental dignity of the human individual +against oppression by the reckless reality of external life. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Just to show how an avowed free-thinker appreciates the significance +of a commanding spiritual force as against the state we will quote +the French positivist <hi rend='italic'>A. Comte</hi>, who declares: <q>The absorption of the +spiritual by the worldly power is a return to barbarity; the separation +of the two powers, however, is the principle for mental uplift and +moral dignity.</q> <q>True,</q> says he, <q>men struggle in blind aversion +against spiritual power of any kind; yet it will even then prevail, +though in a mistaken way. Professors, authors, and newspaper writers +will then pose as the speculative leaders of mankind, although they +lack all mental and moral qualification for it</q> (Cours de philosophie +positive). +</p> + +<p> +Short-sighted perception may upbraid the Catholic Church; but a +far-sighted judgment will have to concede that mankind owes gratitude +to the Church and the Papacy. A noted Protestant writer remarks: +<q>But for the Papacy the Middle Ages would have fallen a prey to barbarity. +Even in our day the liberty of nations would be threatened +with greatest danger if there were no Papacy. It is the most effective +counterpoise to an omnipotent power of the state. If it did not +exist, it would have to be invented</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Hübler</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='375'/><anchor id='Pg375'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Fifth Section. Theology.</head> + +<pb n='377'/><anchor id='Pg377'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter I. Theology And Science.</head> + +<p> +Now one other, the concluding point. So far our discussion +has dealt almost exclusively with the profane sciences, and +while there were often under discussion general principles, applying +also to theology, we did not refer to the latter expressly for +the reason that it occupies a special position in regard to our +question. Theology is the science of the faith, its subjects +are truths established by divine or inspired authority; hence, +in teaching, authority plays a larger part in this than in any +other science. For this reason much fault is found with theology, +and many consider that it forfeits thereby its claim to +rank as a science. They say it lacks all liberty, the results +are prescribed; it lacks possibility of progress; nothing but rigid +dogmas, rejecting all development and improvement; its vocation +is exhausted by the incessant transmitting of the immutable; +hence it lacks all the essential conditions of a true science, +it has no claim to a place at the university; if it nevertheless +has established itself at the university, as is the case in some +countries, it must be considered as an alien body, a remnant +of an obsolete time. +</p> + +<p> +A keen eye cannot fail to detect in these words the prompting +voice of that view of the world which rejects everything supernatural, +and declares that Christian dogmatics and morals, and +ideas of sin, redemption, humility of faith, cross, and self-denial, +do no longer correspond to modern man. At bottom is the +struggle between the two views of the world—one the philosophy +of modern, sovereign man, the other the contemplation of +the world in the light of Christianity: a process of repulsion, +psychologically easily understood, by which the one seeks to expel +<pb n='378'/><anchor id='Pg378'/> +the other from the position which it desires to occupy. A +closer examination of the matter will show this. +</p> + +<div> +<head>Theology as a Science.</head> + +<p> +Is theology a science in the proper sense? May it rightly +claim a place among the branches of human science? This +shall be the first question to be answered. Theology, meaning +the doctrine of God, is the science of the Revelation, or of the +faith; of the Revelation which began in the Old Testament +and reached its perfection in Christ, the Son of God, in whom +appeared the fulness of God, the image of the glory of God, +the perfection of all religion; the Revelation intrusted to the +Church to be preserved infallibly, so that by these truths, and +means of salvation, the Church might guide and enrich the +life of believing mankind. Hence, in the broad sense in which +it is understood now, theology is the science that gathers the +revealed truths from their sources, endeavours to grasp and to +defend them, and to deduce new truths from them; which also +studies these truths and the means given for salvation, in their +development and effect in the Christian life. +</p> + +<p> +Thus it includes a wide range of subordinate branches, connected +by a common object. The biblical sciences have for +their subject Holy Writ; the sciences of introduction to the +Bible deal with its external history, with historical criticism +playing an important part; exegesis is occupied with the +scientific interpretation of the text and uncovers the treasures +of truth in Holy Writ, assisted in this task by hermeneutics +and a number of philosophical-historical auxiliary sciences. +Ecclesiastical history and its branches of patrology, history +of dogma, ecclesiastical archæology, and art, and other auxiliary +sciences, describe the doctrine of Revelation in its historical +course through the centuries, and its development in the bosom +of the Church. Dogmatics (with apologetics) and morals have +the task to explain and defend the doctrine of faith and morals, +as drawn from the Scriptures and from tradition, to deduce new +truths from them and to unite them all in a system. Finally, +Canon law, and even to a greater degree the departments of +<pb n='379'/><anchor id='Pg379'/> +pastoral theology, homiletics, liturgy, show how the treasures +of Revelation and Redemption find their realization in the +practical life of the Church and of the Christian people. +</p> + +<p> +Hence there cannot be any doubt but that theology is a +science in the proper sense, unless a wrong definition of science +is presumed. Of course, if we should identify science in +general with empirical science, and scientific methods with the +methods of natural sciences and mathematics, and refuse to +recognize any results as scientific except those gained by observation +and mathematical calculation, then, of course, theology +would not be a science, nor would many other branches of +knowledge come under this head; the fault, however, would +lie with a narrow conception, that limits itself to the portion +of human knowledge within its vision, ignoring everything +that exists beyond its horizon. +</p> + +<p> +What are we to understand by science? It is the systematic +concentration of the knowledge and the research of things according +to their causes; hence of our cognition of a subject +that can be proved by careful demonstration to be certain +or at least probable. This we find to be the case in +theology. It is the sum total, systematically arranged, of +knowledge and researches concerning the tenets of faith, considered +in the abstract, in their history, and in their effects on +the life of the Church. Applying the method of natural +thought, theology first studies the presumptions and foundations +of faith, examines the sources of revelation by the philosophical +and historical-critical method, proves the doctrines of +faith by these sources, endeavours to grasp these truths intellectually, +by the methods of analytical and synthetical thinking, and +to make clear their connection. We have here the same methods +as applied in other sciences: ascertaining the facts, definition of +terms, deduction, induction. In respect to the history of the +Church and to Canon law their similarity with analogous profane +sciences is at once obvious. +</p> + +<p> +There is one <emph>difference</emph>: in the theological sciences there +is active, not only rational research, but also the <emph>belief</emph> in revealed +truths. In some departments, like that of ecclesiastical +history, this difference is less pronounced, they proceed by the +<pb n='380'/><anchor id='Pg380'/> +method of critically establishing and connecting the facts; +but they, too, are guided by the conviction that there is in the +life of the Church not only natural causation, but also supernatural +principle. Dogmatics takes faith to a greater degree as +its point of support, in order to connect natural reason with the +convictions of faith, and how richly natural reason may unfold +itself is shown in the works of <hi rend='italic'>St. Augustine</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas</hi>, +on the great mysteries of the faith. As regards faith itself, +we must keep in mind that it has a scientific foundation: the +credibility of revelation is proven, it is a reasoning faith. It +may be likened to history. The historian, on the testimony of +his sources, believes in the actuality of human events, having +convinced himself of the credibility of his sources; this belief +becomes then his starting point for further researches of a pragmatical +nature: he penetrates more deeply into the facts, and +connects them according to their causal relations. The difference +is this: the historian rests upon human authority, the +theologian upon divine. +</p> + +<p> +Yet the objection is raised: theology is faith, or at least +rests on faith. Faith, however, has nothing to do with science; +faith is sentiment, whereas science is knowledge. That this view +of faith is wrong, and the result of subjective agnosticism that +denies to man any positive understanding of supernatural +truths, we have shown repeatedly. Certainly, if faith were +nothing but sentiment, no science could be built upon it; you +cannot build stone houses upon water. But the Catholic faith +is not simply sentiment, it is a conviction of reason, based upon +God's testimony that the revealed doctrines are true. In the +same way that the historian—to use the comparison once more—believes +positively in his historical facts, on the strength of the +authority of a <hi rend='italic'>Livy</hi> or <hi rend='italic'>Tacitus</hi>, or accepts as proved some events +of ancient times, relying upon the testimony of Babylonian +tablets of clay or upon the pyramids, and makes these events his +starting point for further researches, without having to fear objections +to his work on the ground that knowledge and belief +are incompatible; just so the theologian believes in his religious +truths because they are vouched for by God's testimony. This +proves that the foundation for his further thought is not formed +<pb n='381'/><anchor id='Pg381'/> +by uncontrollable, irrational sentiment, but by a conviction of +reason. +</p> + +<p> +Hence, if by knowledge is meant nothing but a conviction +of reason—and in this sense faith and knowledge are usually +contrasted by modern philosophical writers—then faith is +knowledge in the proper sense and a contradiction does not exist. +If, however, knowledge is taken to be the understanding gained +by personal insight without reliance on external testimony, then, +of course, there is a distinction, and theology would not be a +science, in so far as it <emph>believes</emph>; just as little as history would +be a science, in so far as it believes its sources. But theology is a +science, in so far as it makes use of experience and reason, examines +its sources, draws from them the facts of faith, and +makes them the starting point for its investigations. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Theology also has mysteries among its subjects, namely, truths whose +actuality is cognizable, but whose contents, while not indeed inconsistent, +yet remain obscure and incomprehensible to us. But even this does +not impair its scientific character. Other sciences share with it this lot +of human limitation. Instances are plentiful in natural science where +the existence of natural forces of one kind or another is proven; of +which it is able to form some idea, but cannot fathom; they remain a +puzzle to science, sometimes presenting the greatest difficulties. For instance, +ether, gravitation, electricity, the nature of motion, and so on. +The noted physicist <hi rend='italic'>J. J. Thomson</hi> says: <q>Gravitation is the secret of +secrets. But the very same holds good of all molecular forces, of magnetism, +electricity, etc. There are in animated nature even more things +we cannot understand. We could say that of the processes of living +organisms we understand practically nothing. Our knowledge of indigestion, +of propagation, of instinct, is so small that we can almost say +it is limited to the enumeration of them. What we do know and understand +is not one thousandth part of what would be necessary for a +knowledge in any degree complete. <q>If we raise an arm,</q> says <hi rend='italic'>Pasteur</hi>, +<q>or put our teeth in action, we do something that no one can +explain.</q></q> +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Theology and Progress.</head> + +<p> +With a very superficial conception of theology we might +easily arrive at the opinion that it lacks a characteristic of +science, which, in our time especially, is insisted upon, namely, +progress. For it must adhere to dogmas and not go beyond +them. Hence, seemingly, there is nothing to do for theology +<pb n='382'/><anchor id='Pg382'/> +but to transmit unchangeable truths, perhaps in different aspects, +but nevertheless the same truths. +</p> + +<p> +It must be admitted that one kind of progress is barred in +theology, as also in other sciences; to wit, the progress of +incessant remodelling and reshaping, the continuous tearing +down of the old facts, the eternal search after truth without +ever gaining its possession. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This is often the progress demanded. <q>The new tuition,</q> it is said, +<q>starts from the premise that the truth is to be searched for</q> +(<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). <q>Science is not a perfected doctrine, but a research, ever +to be revised</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Harnack</hi>). It is particularly demanded of theology +that it procure a <hi rend='smallcaps'>further development of Christianity</hi>, and substitute +for it thoughts which modern age has adopted and which it calls +scientific thinking. <q>There remains the task,</q> they say, <q>of expressing +faith and its objects so as to coincide with the conception formed by +scientific thinking of the natural and historical reality</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). +Hence miracles, the divinity of Christ, and mysteries of any kind, +must be eliminated; even the notion of a personal God will have to +be changed to a pantheistic notion: <q>After the great revolution in our +cosmic theories we can no longer think of God, the eternal holy Will that +we revere as First Cause of all things, as the <q>first mover</q> throning +outside and above the universe, as <hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Thomas</hi> did</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>). +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Such a progress is impossible in theology, at least in Catholic +theology, and in any other that still aims to be the theology of +the Christian, revealed religion. It cannot be expected from +theology, nor from any other science, that it will degrade itself +to a fashionable science, that takes for its level not truth but the +variable imperatives and moods of the times, and, destitute of +character, changes with each varying fashion. The science of +faith cannot assume this position, so much the less as it must +be aware that its truths often clash with the inclinations of +the human heart, and that its vocation is to lift up mankind, +not to let itself be dragged down. This kind of progress therefore +is barred. This, indeed, is not progress, but a hopeless +wavering from pillar to post, a building and tearing down, +acquiring without permanent possession, searching without +finding. +</p> + +<p> +<emph>True progress</emph> can be shown in theology as in any other +science. +</p> + +<p> +The <emph>possibility</emph> of progress is manifest, particularly, in +<pb n='383'/><anchor id='Pg383'/> +Church-history, in the biblical and pastoral sciences: they are +closely related to the profane-historical, philological, social, and +juridical branches of science, hence theology shares in their +progress. It would seem that dogmatics would have to forego +progress. Its progress certainly cannot consist in changing +the revealed doctrines, nor in interpreting differently in +the course of times the formulas of creed; here the rule is, +<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>veritas Domini manet in aeternum</foreign>. The development of dogmatic +knowledge consists rather in the following: the revealed +truths are in the course of the centuries more and more clearly +perceived and more sharply circumscribed, more surely demonstrated, +more and more extensively appreciated in their connections, +relations, and deductions. The sources of Divine Revelation +flow the richer the more they are drawn from; their truths +are so substantial, so abundant in relation to knowledge and +life, that, the more research advances, the less it reaches its limit. +<q>No one gets nearer to the realization of truth than he who +perceives that in divine things, no matter how far he progresses, +there remains always something more to be examined</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Leo the +Great</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Consider the progress in mathematics. No one will say the +mathematician is doomed to stagnation because he cannot +change the multiplication table or the geometrical propositions. +The increasing mathematical literature, with its big volumes, +contradicts this notion: but its growth of knowledge is not the +zigzag progress of restless to and fro, it is the solid progress +from the seed to the plant. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +As early as the fifth century <hi rend='italic'>St. Vincent</hi> of Lerin described the +progress in dogmatical knowledge: <q>Sed forsitan dicet aliquis: +Nullusne ergo in Ecclesia Christi profectus habebitur religionis? +Habeatur plane et maximus. Nam quis ille est tam invidus hominibus, +tam exosus Deo, qui istud prohibere conetur? Sed ita tamen, +ut vere profectus sit ille fidei, non permutatio. Siquidem ad profectum +pertinet, ut in semetipsum quaeque res amplificetur; ad +permutationem vero, ut aliquid ex alio in aliud transvertatur. Crescat +igitur oportet et multum vehementerque proficiat tam singulorum +quam omnium, tam unius hominis, quam totius Ecclesiae, aetatum ac +saeculorum gradibus, intelligentia, scientia, sapientia, sed in suo +duntaxat genere, in eodem scilicet dogmate, eodem sensu eademque +sententia.... Quodeunque igitur in hac Ecclesiae Dei agricultura fide +Patrum satum est, hoc idem filiorem industria decet excolatur et +<pb n='384'/><anchor id='Pg384'/> +observetur, hoc idem floreat et maturescat, hoc idem proficiat et perficiatur. +Fas est etenim, ut prisca illa coelestis philosophiae dogmata +processu temporis excurentur, limentur, poliantur, sed nefas est, ut +commutentur, nefas, ut detruncentur, ut mutilentur.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +The <emph>proof for the actual progress</emph> of theology is furnished +by its history. It shows how theology has gradually +grown from the first seed of the divine Word, placed by the hand +of God's Son into the soil of humanity, until it became a +great tree, rich in branches and leaves. The holiest men of the +Christian centuries, equipped with the choicest mental forces, +enlightened by the light of grace, have worked on its growth; +toiling and praying, they filled libraries with their books. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +It is not our intention to outline here a sketch of this development. +A few hints may suffice. Hardly had the faith taken root in the civilized +nations of the old times when researches were begun. A long list +of Holy Fathers and ecclesiastical authors were the bearers of the first +development. Drawing upon Greek philosophy in aid and to deepen +their thought in the mental battle against the ancient pagan view of +the world, against Judaism and heresy, they elucidated more and more +the tenets of faith and morals, and endeavoured to draw ever more fully +from their spiritual contents. We encounter among the shining host +men like <hi rend='italic'>Tertullian</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Cyprian</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Clement of Alexandria</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Origines</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Cyril of +Jerusalem</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Basil</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Gregory of Nyssa</hi>, and many others, up to the powerful +dogmatist of the old time, <hi rend='italic'>Augustine</hi>, who treated scientifically and +often extensively the great dogmas of faith. Truly a voluminous theological +literature with a plethora of genius and truth. The great edition +of the Greek and Latin Fathers by <hi rend='italic'>Migne</hi> numbers 382 volumes in +quarto, each of 1,500 pages or more in close print. Comparing with these +382 volumes the modest book of the Bible, which had been their foremost +source, the progress of these centuries becomes manifest. +</p> + +<p> +Soon the way was broken for systematizing the tenets of the +faith, especially by <hi rend='italic'>St. John Damascene</hi> (eighth century). Scholasticism +completed the work: it created a systematical whole and +connected theology and philosophy, especially the Aristotelian, into a +harmonious union. Its pioneers were <hi rend='italic'>St. Anselm</hi> and still more +<hi rend='italic'>Petrus Lombard</hi> (died 1160). Then, in the Middle Ages, when universities +began to flourish, there followed the great theologians <hi rend='italic'>Alexander +of Hales</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bonaventure</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Albert the Great</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Scotus</hi>, and chief of all +<hi rend='italic'>Thomas of Aquin</hi> (died 1274), in whom scholasticism reached its perfection, +and undeniably one of the greatest minds known in the history +of science; distinguished by an astonishing prolificness, still more by +a wealth and depth of thought combined with the greatest simplicity +and lucidity in presenting truths, he will for ever remain unapproachable. +The decline of scholasticism during the fourteenth and fifteenth +centuries was followed by a new bloom, when the life of the Church, +rejuvenated by the Council of Trent, gave birth to new forces in +<pb n='385'/><anchor id='Pg385'/> +theology. The mighty tomes of men like <hi rend='italic'>Suarez</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Lugo</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Gregory of +Valencia</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Ruiz</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Bañez</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Billuart</hi>, and others joined the volumes of their +predecessors and continued their work. At the same time the various +departments of the science were branching off more and more, and +became independent. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='italic'>M. Canus</hi> created the theory of theological cognition as an introduction +to dogmatics, <hi rend='italic'>Bellarmin</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Th. Stapleton</hi> founded the newer +controversial theology. Moral Theology became in the sixteenth century +a separate science and was developed by men like <hi rend='italic'>Lugo</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Laymann</hi>, +<hi rend='italic'>Busembaum</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Alphons of Liguori</hi>. Similarly a new period of research +began in the biblical sciences. Not that the first foundations were laid +at that time; there had been <hi rend='italic'>Origines</hi>, who had become the founder of +biblical text criticism by his <q>Hexapla</q>; the Antioch school of exegetes, +<hi rend='italic'>Chrysostomus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hilarius</hi>, and especially <hi rend='italic'>Jerome</hi>. But it was fostered +with renewed zeal. The great Antwerp and Paris polyglots furnished +aids, men like <hi rend='italic'>Maldonatus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Salmeron</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Toletus</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Cornelius</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>á +Lapide</hi>, wrote their exegetic works. To the seventeenth century belongs +the creation of the propædeutics, by <hi rend='italic'>Richard Simon</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Bernard +Lami</hi>. The monumental work, <q>Cursus sacrae scripturae</q> (since 1885), +containing so far thirty-six volumes, demonstrates, among other things, +that there has been in recent years no standstill in the research in Holy +Writ. In the province of ecclesiastical history, too, with its branches +and auxiliary sciences, new life was awakened at that time. In the +sixteenth century, when the defence of the creed by the witnesses of +a former age became urgent, patristics and history of dogma enjoyed +their first rise. <hi rend='italic'>Petavius</hi> was prominently connected with them. How +these sciences have been fostered in the nineteenth century is indicated +by the names of <hi rend='italic'>Mai</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>De Rossi</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hergenroether</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Hefele</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Pastor</hi>. There +remains to be mentioned the gradual establishment of the science +of Canon law, of the pastoral-theological departments which have attained +an independent position since the close of the eighteenth century, +and since then produced a voluminous literature. The fear of a +standstill in theological research seems unwarranted in the light of its +history. The errors of the present time will prevent a standstill. +The more vehement the attacks by natural science and philosophy, by +philology and archæology, the more they seek to shake the foundations +of the Christian religion, the stronger theology must grow by the +combat. The solid progress of our times in knowledge and methodics +will not remain without influence; nor can the empirical, the historical-critical +method, the theory of evolution, and so on, fail to exert +their stimulating influence upon theology. +</p> + +<p> +The progress that Catholic theology has made since the days of the +Fathers, the vast amount of mental work it has performed, is perhaps +made most clear by a glance at the <q>Nomenclator literarius theologiae +catholicae,</q> by <hi rend='italic'>H. Hurter</hi> (2d ed., 3 vols.; the 3d ed. is in 6 vols., 5 +being ready). It gives in concise briefness the biographical data and +the more important works of Catholic theologians of greater repute. +Counting the names there presented, we find not less than 3,900 from +1109 to 1563; about 2,900 from 1564 to 1663; about 3,900 between 1664 +and 1763; finally, from 1764 to 1894 about 4,000 theological authors; +hence in the period from 1109 to 1894 nearly 14,700 theologians. That +<pb n='386'/><anchor id='Pg386'/> +these 14,700 scientists—and their number is not exhausted by this +figure—should have written their works without offering in them +any new knowledge, would surely be a bold assertion! In addition +consider the long rows of tomes which some of them wrote. +Perhaps it would not be wholly amiss to refer to the restless zeal +of many of them, as recorded by their biographers. <hi rend='italic'>Baronius</hi> (died +1607) could truthfully assert before his death, that for thirty years +he had never had sufficient sleep; he usually slept only four or five +hours. <hi rend='italic'>Pierre Halloix</hi> (died 1656) likewise was content with four +or five hours of rest. <hi rend='italic'>Dionysius Sanmarthanus</hi> (died 1725) gave only +four hours to sleep and devoted less than half an hour daily to +recreation; likewise <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Combéfis</hi> (died 1679), during the last forty +years of his life. <hi rend='italic'>A. Fr. Orsi</hi> (died 1761) contented himself with +three or four hours of sleep; <hi rend='italic'>Fr. Clement</hi> (died 1793) and <hi rend='italic'>H. Oberrauch</hi> +(died 1808) are said to have slept but two hours daily. <hi rend='italic'>J. +Caramuel de Lobkowicz</hi> (died 1682) persevered for fourteen hours every +day at his books; <hi rend='italic'>Chr. Lupus</hi> (died 1681) even for fifteen hours daily. +The theologian <hi rend='italic'>Lessius</hi> is characterized by <q><hi rend='italic'>Parcissimus erat temporis, +laboris pertinax</hi></q>; the same holds good of hundreds of others of +these men. +</p> + +<p> +A science, enumerating its disciples by so many thousands, with +the greatest intellects among its workers, which has commanded so +much zeal and work for centuries, should be safe from the reproach +of having back of it a history of stagnation. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Theology and Freedom of Science.</head> + +<p> +To many it seems obvious that theology lacks at least the +other predicate of science, freedom; because it is bound to +dogmas and ecclesiastical authorities, at least Catholic theology +is. +</p> + +<p> +Although this claim is pressed persistently and with confidence, +we may dispose of it very briefly. The freedom missed in +theology, and demanded in its behalf, is none other than the +liberal freedom of science, the nature of which we have had +sufficiently long under the searchlight, so that there remains +nothing to be added. We have proved sufficiently that this +freedom is not a freedom from unnatural fetters, but a dissolute +subjectivism, that claims the right not to be bound to any +unchangeable, religious truths. We admit that the Catholic +theology does not possess <emph>THIS</emph> freedom. Convinced of the +truth of the doctrines established by divine testimony, and by the +infallible voice of the Church, theology sees not freedom but a +sin against truth in the license to assert the contrary of what +it has recognized as the truth. +</p> + +<pb n='387'/><anchor id='Pg387'/> + +<p> +There is but one freedom which science may claim: it is +freedom from hindrance in reaching the truth in its legitimate +domain. If this truth is transmitted to science infallibly, by +the highest instance of wisdom—and of this every theologian +is convinced—how can science be said to be hindered thereby +in attaining the truth? Restrained it is, but only by truth: +truth, however, can only be a barrier to license, but not to +precious freedom. This restraint theology shares with the +rest of the sciences. The physicist is tied to the facts brought +forth by the experiments of his laboratory; the astronomer is +tied to the results reported to him by the instruments of his +observatory, the historian is tied to the events disclosed by +his sources. Moreover, all sciences are tied to their methods. +In this way, and in no other way, the theologian, too, is +tied to the facts given him by Revelation, and to his method. +Every science has its own method. The astronomer gains +his facts by observation and calculation, the mathematician +arrives at his facts by calculation and study; the historian, +by human testimony; the theologian, however, by divine testimony, +at least as to fundamental truths. That they are transmitted +to him not by his personal study, but by external testimony, +does not matter; the historian too draws from such +sources. Nor can theological knowledge be less certain because +vouched for by divine authority: it makes it the more certain. +Or is there no divine authority, and can there be none? This is +exactly the silent presumption, which is the basis of the charge +against theology. But where is the proof for it? It can only +be demonstrated by denying the existence of a supermundane +God; for, if there is an Almighty God, there can be no doubt +that He can give a Revelation and demand belief. +</p> + +<p> +Perhaps it may be said further, the theologian is not permitted +to doubt his doctrines, hence he is prohibited from +examining them; he surely cannot be <emph>unprepossessed</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +We can refer to what we have previously said. Unprepossession +demands but one thing, namely, not to assume something +as true and certain that is false or unproved; it demands +strong proofs for anything that needs proof. We may +safely assert that there is no other science more exacting in this +<pb n='388'/><anchor id='Pg388'/> +respect than Catholic theology, both of the present and of the +past. It has not a single position that is not incessantly tested +by attacks as to its tenability. Any one not unacquainted with +theology, who knows the works of <hi rend='italic'>St. Thomas</hi> and of the later +theologians, with their exact methods of thinking, who observes +the conscientious work in Catholic biblical-exegetic, historical-critical +field, must be convinced of the serious atmosphere of +truth prevailing here. Unprepossession does not demand to +doubt, time and again, that which has been positively proved, to +rediscover it by new research. Positive facts are no longer a +subject for research; in their case research has fully achieved +its end. Methodical doubt, proper in scientific examination, is +proper also in regard to religious truths. +</p> + +<p> +Furthermore, the latitude of the theologian is much larger +than presumed by those who derive their information solely +from modern assertions about dogmatic bondage. One may +safely assert that the freedom of movement of the mathematician +is more limited by his principles, his train of thought more +sharply prescribed, than is the case with the theologian. Of +course the theologian is bound by everything he finds infallibly +established directly by revelation and by the authority of the +Church; or indirectly by the concurring teaching of the +Fathers or the theologians; he is bound also by non-infallible +decisions, especially those of congregations, though not absolutely +and not irrevocably. +</p> + +<p> +But this is only the smaller part of his province. In many +departments, like the one of ecclesiastical history, there are +almost no restrictions to his research, except those imposed by +historical facts. Canon law and similar departments dealing +with the laws of the Church, coincide in method and liberty +of research with the profane science of law. Of all departments +of theology, the dogmatical is the one most affected by +the authority of faith. Yet even here a great deal is left to +unhampered work. Many a void has to be filled, many a +question solved, which the theology of the past has never taken +up; even the defined truths still offer a large scope for personal +work, in regard to demonstration, or to the philosophic-speculative +penetration of the dogmas and their interpretation. +</p> + +<pb n='389'/><anchor id='Pg389'/> + +<p> +As a fact, the reader of theological literature, both old and +new, will, in a multitude of cases, meet with unrestrained +individuality. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Ecclesiastical Supervision of Teaching.</head> + +<p> +The <hi rend='italic'>Encyclica</hi> against Modernism (September 8, 1907) +gave rise to fears that any free movement would henceforth +be impossible for Catholic theology. These fears referred +chiefly to the disciplinary measures, prescribed by the Encyclical +for the purpose of supervising theological teaching in each +diocese. Then came the papal Motu Proprio, of September 1, +1910, which, among other things, required the teacher of theology +to confirm by oath his confession of the Creed and his +intention to repudiate modernistic errors. Since then many a +complaint has been heard about espionage and coercion. Similar +complaint, about an imminent debasement of the Church, +has been raised whenever important measures in the discipline +of the Catholic Church were published, and they emanated primarily +from the camp of the enemy. +</p> + +<p> +It is not to be denied, however, that such an energetic call +for watchfulness and action, issued from the highest ecclesiastical +watchtower, like the one referred to, may lead in some +cases to anxiety and false suspicions. This is no doubt regrettable; +but it is an incident common to human legislation and +will surprise no one who has any experience of life. A glance +at these decrees will show that they are nothing more than +an urgent injunction, and the exercise of that supervision +of religious life and teaching which pertains to the authority +of the Catholic Church, and which has been practised by her +at all times. The language is urgent, it has a severity which +is softened in the execution. Its explanation lies in the eminent +danger of the modernistic movement to the continuance +of Catholic life. Modernism, as described and condemned by +the Encyclica, is nothing less than the absolute destruction of +the Catholic faith, and of Christianity. +</p> + +<p> +The Protestant theologian, Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Tröltsch</hi>, wrote after the +publication of the Encyclica: <q>As viewed from the position of +<pb n='390'/><anchor id='Pg390'/> +curialism and of the strict Catholic dogma, there existed a real +danger. Catholicism had gotten into a state of inner fermentation, +corresponding to the same condition caused by modern +theology within the Protestant churches.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The danger of Modernism is often enhanced by a deceptive +semblance of the right faith, and by the pretence to urge only +the righteous interests of modern progress against obsolete forms +of thought and life, now and then also by its secret propaganda. +Hence this intervention by a firm hand, and this only after +having waited a long time. They were measures of prevention, +like those taken to stave off a serious danger; the tidal wave +receding, their urgency disappears automatically. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The German bishops stated in their pastoral letter of December 10, +1907, that in some Catholic lay-circles there was uneasiness about the +Encyclical, fearing that it might endanger scientific endeavour and +independence in thought and research, and that the Church intended +to prohibit or render impossible co-operation in solving the problems of +civilization. <q>May they all recognize,</q> they said, <q>how groundless such +fears are! The Church desires to set bars only to one kind of freedom—the +freedom to err.</q> If the rules and precepts of the Church do sound +harsh sometimes, it is because the Church adheres unconditionally to +the principle: The truth above all. <q>The Church has at no time opposed +the true progress of civilization, but only that which hinders its +progress: heedlessness, haste, the mania for innovation, the morbid +aversion against the truth that comes from God. But we Catholic Christians +can join free and unhampered, with all our strength and talent, +in the peaceful strife of noble, intellectual work and genuine mental +education.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The fears of too great a pressure by the ecclesiastical authorities +have been given trenchant expression in most recent times by a man +who, while standing outside of the Catholic Church, has always shown +himself well disposed towards it, namely, the noted pedagogue, <hi rend='italic'>Fr. W. +Förster</hi> of Zurich. <hi rend='italic'>Förster</hi> has won merit and distinction by his +manly and spirited defence of the Christian view in pedagogical science +and mental culture. In the book referred to he again describes +urgently the worthlessness and fatality of modern individualism, that +knows a good deal about freedom but nothing of self-discipline, nor +of authority or tradition, and which represents most superficial amateurism +in the domain of religion and morals. Then he turns to +criticize Church practice; and his criticism becomes a sharp accusation. +His main charge is <q>fatal restraint of the spirit of universality.</q> +<q>Some groups in the Church,</q> he asserts, <q>of mediocre learning, have +established a clique rule, under which the others, the more creative and +intensive souls, become the victims of intolerance, espionage, and false +suspicion</q>; <q>universality, which unites the different mental tendencies, +<pb n='391'/><anchor id='Pg391'/> +has given way to separation</q>; <q>everywhere a one-sided denunciatory +information of the leading circles by accidentally ruling groups and +factions; anxious intolerance for everything unusual, disciplinary +austerity and unintelligent pedantry, individualistic and unchristian +spirit of distrust and mutual espionage</q>; <q>levelling of the mental +life</q>; <q>one is tired,</q> we are told, <q>of the spirit of incessant disciplining</q>; +<q>of the invariable cold and disdainful forbidding and repression.</q> +In the Middle Ages and earlier times it was different; +then <q>universality was the ruling spirit, the working of the many into +a unit full of life; this policy was changed for no other reason than +because of the struggle of the Church against Protestantism.</q> <q>The +greatest harm that Catholicism suffered by the great rupture of the +sixteenth century is most likely seen in the tendency of the Church +to view thenceforth religious freedom within Catholic Christianity +with an anxious, even hostile eye.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Readers of the literature of the day will recognize here views +often met with during the last years, and the same excited note, which +is quite in contrast to the even temper that ordinarily characterizes +<hi rend='italic'>Förster's</hi> books. But what the reader will not find stated are the proofs +for these enormous accusations. +</p> + +<p> +Undeniably, things have happened in the wide range of ecclesiastical +authority that cannot be approved. But where are the facts that +would justify charges of such sweeping nature? A Protestant author +can hardly be presumed to possess such a direct and positive insight +into the ecclesiastical practice of the higher and the highest order, to +give convincing strength to his bare assertion. Or is the number of +dissatisfied voices that make these charges sufficient proof in itself? +If the ecclesiastical authority be allowed, now and then, to emerge from +its passiveness to take measures against dangerous doctrinal tendencies, +is it not to be expected, as a matter of course, that some +minds become disgruntled and complain about oppression and clique +rule? Or must that right be denied the Church altogether? <hi rend='italic'>Förster</hi> +says himself: <q>The spirit of dignity and responsibility has never ruled +all parts of the hierarchy in the same measure as now, and rarely +if ever were there found in its leading circles so many men leading an +almost holy life as at present.</q> And yet we are asked to believe +that it was reserved exactly for this worthy hierarchy, and for these +saintly men, to forget the traditions of the Church in the most irresponsible +manner. One will have to say: <q>If <hi rend='italic'>Förster</hi> would examine +without bias the situation and apply consistently in respect to +authority the principles that he himself defends, he would be convinced +that the Church could not have acted any differently than it +did in regard to the regrettable events of the last years, and that +it has ever been the aim of the Church, before the sixteenth century +as after, to guard carefully the purity of traditions of faith against +any attack</q> (Prof. <hi rend='italic'>G. Reinhold</hi> in a review of <hi rend='italic'>Förster's</hi> book). +</p> + +<p> +The Church has never known a universality that did not oppose +doctrinal errors. The Middle Ages did not know it; one need only +read the many condemnations from Nicholas I. to Innocent VIII.; +nor was such a universality known to the great Councils of ancient +<pb n='392'/><anchor id='Pg392'/> +Christianity up to the Nicæan, which hurled its anathema against +numerous teachings that opposed no dogmas defined at that time; +nor did the Holy Fathers know such a universality, nor the Apostles, +with their strict admonitions of unity of faith. The reply is made, +the <q>Church must not yield the least of its fundamental truths,</q> that +<q>its centralizing power ought to remain within the region of the +most essential</q>; whereas she actually exercises it in the domain of the +incidental. The ecclesiastical supervision of teaching has never limited +itself to the most essential, nor would this practice ever accomplish +the object to preserve pure the doctrine of faith. Furthermore, what +is the <q>most essential</q> what is the <q>incidental</q>? <hi rend='italic'>Förster's</hi> book +does not inform us about this most important question. The views +against which the Church has made front in the last years, do they +relate only to the incidental? Does this apply to the doctrines of a +<hi rend='italic'>Rosmini</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Lamennais</hi>, who are referred to in passing? No well-informed +theologian will assert this. +</p> + +<p> +We shall hardly be wrong in assuming that the charge of overstraining +the ecclesiastical authority is based upon a presumption of a +philosophical nature, which is in evidence in several other passages of +the book—on the view, namely, that in religion the intellectual moment +should recede before the mystical, before anticipation and inner +experience. Hence the severe censure of <q>the narrow autocracy +of the intellectual interpretation</q> against the <q>preponderance of the +intellectual contemplation</q> in the Church, which is said to have +become so prevalent as to exert unavoidably a paralyzing effect +upon the entire religious life. Here we have the result of the notion +that theory of life, religion, and faith, depend but little on rational +knowledge. This notion is also in accord with the argument about +the impossibility of an independent scientific ethics. We have discussed +this elsewhere. We demonstrated that religion and faith relate to +positive truths that can be realized, and that can therefore be accurately +defined; they must be so defined. Of course this realization +need not be a scientific one, it can be of the natural kind that is +not clearly conscious of its reasons. <hi rend='italic'>Förster</hi>, too, touches upon this +important distinction when quoting <hi rend='italic'>Saitschick</hi>: <q>The inner perception +overtowers feeling and logical reason—here, too, lies the source of +a light shining brighter, stronger, and incomparably more true than +any light of reason</q>; and again, when his advice is, to foster to a +greater extent the <q>inner perception.</q> What is felt here vaguely +has long since been expressed much more lucidly in Christian philosophy. +</p> + +<p> +Certainly a view that fails to lay, first of all, absolute stress on the +protection of the <emph>doctrine</emph> of faith cannot understand the Catholic point +of view; it will assume only too easily that the supervision relates to +incidentals. It will also engender a criticism against which the Church +may rightly protest, because it starts from presumptions that do not +apply to the Church. +</p> + +<p> +No one will be astonished to find a Protestant author lacking the +clarified conception of the supernatural character of the Church that is +possessed by the Catholic; to see him view the Church almost invariably +in the light of a human organization, similar to the Protestant +<pb n='393'/><anchor id='Pg393'/> +denominations which he may cite before the court of his individual reason +and force to bow under the yoke of his criticism. The Catholic has +a better understanding of the words: <q>I am with you all days, even +unto the consummation of the world.</q> There will be foreign to his +mind the idea that the Church has since the days of Reformation, for +now nearly four centuries, deviated from the right way, and degenerated +more and more to a separatistic and insignificant community; a +church able to forget its traditions to the extent of grossly misconceiving +its proper sphere of authority, and fettering itself in a +narrow spirit to incidentals, could not keep his confidence any longer. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>The Oath Against Modernism.</head> + +<p> +The <hi rend='italic'>Motu Proprio</hi> of September 1, 1910, decreed that +teachers of theology, and also Catholic priests generally, had to +bind themselves by oath to reject modernistic heresies, and to +accept obediently the ecclesiastical precepts. Dispensed from +this pledge were only the professors of theology at state institutions, +to spare them difficulties with state authorities. +</p> + +<p> +This anti-modernist oath at once became the signal for a +storm of indignation, than which there has been hardly a greater +one since the days of the Vatican Council. A cry was raised +for freedom of science, for the exclusion of theological faculties, +even for another <q>Kulturkampf.</q> The General Convention +of German college professors, held at Leipzig January 7, +1911, issued a declaration to the effect that <q>All those who +have taken the anti-modernist oath have thereby expressed their +renunciation of an independent recognition of truth and of the +exercise of their scientific conviction, hence they have forfeited +all claim to be considered independent scientists.</q> Interpellations +were made in legislative bodies, it was demanded +that the option of taking the oath should be taken away from +university professors, because <q>the dignity of the universities +would be lowered if their members had the opportunity to +bind themselves by such an oath.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Even threats were made by statesmen, hinting at reprisals by +the state, because its interests were being jeopardized, while, on +the other hand, there were those who declared: <q>If the Catholic +Church thinks it necessary for her ecclesiastical and religious +interests to put her servants under oath, it is her own business; +<pb n='394'/><anchor id='Pg394'/> +neither the state nor the Evangelical Church have a right to +interfere</q> (Prime Minister <hi rend='italic'>Bethmann-Hollweg</hi>, in the Prussian +Diet, on March 7, 1911). +</p> + +<p> +The agitation of the minds will soon subside, as on former +occasions of this kind; and, with calm restored, people will +find, as <hi rend='italic'>J. G. Fichte</hi> told the impulsive <hi rend='italic'>F. Nicolai</hi>, one hundred +and thirty years ago, that the fact has only just been discovered +that the Catholics are Catholic. +</p> + +<p> +Yes, indeed, the Catholics are Catholic, and desire to remain +Catholic—this and nothing else is the gist of the anti-modernist +oath. It does not oblige to anything else but what was believed +and adhered to before. It obliges to accept the doctrines of +faith; but they are the old truths of the Catholic Church, propounded +and believed at all times, and the necessary inferences +from them. Even the proposition that truths of faith can never +be contradicted by the results of historical research, or by human +science in general, is as old as faith itself. In addition, the +oath avows obedient submission to Church precepts; but this +has been demanded for centuries by the <hi rend='italic'>professio fidei Tridentina</hi>, +a pledge by oath to which every professor of theology +has been before obliged: <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Apostolicas et ecclesiasticas traditiones +reliquasque eiusdem Ecclesiae observationes et constitutiones +firmissime admitto et amplector</foreign>. This was the opinion of all competent +judges on this theological question. <q>We are convinced,</q> +declared correctly a prominent theological institution, <q>that +there is not assumed by this oath any obligation new in subject, +and no obligation not already existing. The oath is but the affirmation +of a duty already imposed by conscience</q> (the professors +of Theology of Paderborn, December 12, 1910). The Breslau +faculty said, in the same sense: <q>The faculty does not see in +the so-called anti-modernist oath any new obligation, nor one +exceeding the rule of faith ever adhered to by the faculty.</q> +And this declaration was fully approved of by Rome. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Cardinal <hi rend='italic'>Kopp</hi>, at the session of the German Upper House on +April 7, 1911, commented on these statements as follows: <q>Against +the opinions of these circles (having a different opinion of the oath) +I set the testimony and the statement of the most competent people, +to wit, the professors of university faculties and also those at episcopal +seminaries. Those who have taken the oath, as well as those +<pb n='395'/><anchor id='Pg395'/> +who have refrained from it by the privilege granted them by the Holy +See, they both declare positively that the oath does not contain any +new obligations, nor does it impose new duties on them; hence that, +on the contrary, they are not impeded in the pursuit of their tasks as +teachers and of their scientific work of research. Now, gentlemen, I +do not think it would be proper to insinuate that these earnest men, +appointed by the Government, or at least in office by its consent, would +make this declaration against their conviction and not in full +sincerity.</q> +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +No wonder, therefore, that of the hundreds of thousands of +Catholic priests hardly a handful have refused the oath. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Nor is there anything new in the obligation to swear and subscribe +in writing to a confession of creed. Very often in the course of the +centuries decrees of creed and symbols had to be subscribed to in +writing. In the days of Jansenism, when priests were required to +swear to and sign a statement, many Jansenists tried to dodge this +oath, and the Jansenist <hi rend='italic'>Racine</hi> complained that this demand was unheard-of +in the Church. Thereupon the learned theologian <hi rend='italic'>Tournely</hi> +and others cited a number of examples of this kind from the history +of the Church. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Therefore the anti-modernist oath has not created anything +new. Consequently it has not changed anything in regard +to the freedom of theological research. It is the same as before; +nor has the oath changed anything in the quality of theological +professors, they merely promise to be what they must be +anyway; nor can, for instance, the oath induce the Catholic +priest, in teaching profane history, to present the history +of the Reformation in a different light than before, and thus +render him unfit to teach history; the oath has created +no new, confessional differences, hence has given no justified +cause for excitement—provided one has the needed theological +comprehension of the oath. If one has not this insight, and +will not trust to information from a competent source, then +it will be the act of prudence to leave the test to the future; +and we can await this test serenely. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +We referred above to the declaration of German college teachers, +to the effect that all who have taken the oath have thereby expressed +their renunciation of independent cognition of truth. These stereotyped +ideas we have so often heard, with the same haziness and inconsistency. +<q>Because they have thereby expressed the renunciation +of independent cognition of the truth,</q> namely, by the acceptance +of certain doctrines. But is not every one who clings to his Christian +<pb n='396'/><anchor id='Pg396'/> +belief bound by this very fact to certain doctrines? Does every one who +still prays his Credo express the renunciation of his independence? If +the argument quoted is to mean anything at all, it means the full +rejection of all Christian duty to believe; indeed, this is the real +sense of this <q>independent recognition of truth,</q> as we have already +seen. But cannot some one, because of his conviction, renounce this +independence and believe, and in this conviction accept the doctrines +of the Church? If this conviction is his, and he affirms it by oath, +how can any one see in this oath a want of freedom, nay, a renunciation +of truth? If an atheist solemnly declared his intention to be +and to remain an atheist, he would hardly be accused of lack of +character by the advocates of modern freedom of thought. The judge, +the military officer, the member of a legislature, the professor, who must +all take the oath of allegiance,—all of these will have to be protected +against the insinuation of disloyalty to truth. If a man affirms by +oath his unalterable Catholic faith, he is without any hesitation +accused of untruthfulness. The government has been urged to forbid +this spontaneous exercise of Catholic sentiment. The inconsistency of +modern catch-phrases can hardly be given more drastic expression. +In order to guard the freedom of thought the government is to forbid +one from pledging himself to his own principles; in order to remain +an independent thinker a man must be forced by penal statute to +confess unconditionally the brand of free science prescribed by a +certain school and by no means have an opinion of his own; in order +to be free in his research the teacher in theology must be tied to the +catch-phrases of liberal philosophy. This is modern freedom, a +hybrid of freedom and bondage, of sophistry and contradiction, of +arrogance and barrenness of thought, which will exert its rule over +the minds as long as they are guided by half-thinking. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Bonds of Love, not of Servitude.</head> + +<p> +People to whose mind Catholic thinking is foreign will never +be able to appreciate the energetic activity of the Church +authority. +</p> + +<p> +On close examination, however, they will not deny that, <emph>if</emph> +the Christian treasure of faith is to be preserved undiminished, +<emph>if</emph> in the hopeless confusion and the unsteady vacillation of +opinions in our days there is to be left anywhere a safe place for +truth and unity of faith, this cannot be accomplished otherwise +than in the shape of a strong authority that has the +assurance of the aid of God. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The Catholic theologian may be permitted to point in exemplifying +this fact to the recent history of Protestantism and of its theology. +Protestantism does not acknowledge a teaching authority: its theology +<pb n='397'/><anchor id='Pg397'/> +demands complete freedom of research and teaching, making the most +extensive use of both. The result is the demoralization of the Christian +faith, which is speeding with frightfully accelerated steps to total +annihilation. The very danger which Modernism threatened to carry +into the Catholic Church has overwhelmed Protestant theology: the +metaphysical ideas of a modern philosophy penetrated it without +check, and killed its Christian substance. The measures against Modernism +were sharply criticized by many Protestants who, at the same +time, laid stress upon the fact that nothing of the sort could happen +among themselves. Indeed it could not, at least not consistently with +Protestant principle. But there is not a single fact in all history +which demonstrates more clearly the necessity of the Catholic authority +of faith, than just the condition of Protestantism at the present time. +On the part of believing Protestants this is admitted, if not expressly, +then at least in practice. To stem the destructive work of liberal +theology they resort to authority; invoke Evangelical formulas of +confession, the traditional doctrine, sometimes even the aid of the +state; neological preachers are disciplined by censures, even by dismissal, +against the loud protest of the liberals. Such action is easily +understandable; one cannot hear without sadness the cry for help +of pious Protestantism, a cry that grows more desperate every day; +one cannot help regretting its forlorn situation in view of the millions +of souls whose salvation is jeopardized, who are in danger of +being despoiled of the last remains of their Christian faith. Yet it +must be admitted that this cry for authority and obedience signifies +the abandoning of the Protestant principle, and the involuntary imitation +and therefore acknowledgment of the Catholic principle—for +the Catholic an incentive to cleave the more closely to his Church. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Many to whom the Catholic way of thinking is foreign, look +upon the duty of obedience which ties the Catholic to his +Church as a sort of servitude; to the Catholic it is the tie of +love, uniting free people to a sacred authority. Many look +upon the Church of Rome as a tyrannical curia, where Umbrian +prelates are cracking their whips over millions of servile and +ignorant souls; to the Catholic the Church is the divinely appointed +institution of truth, that possesses his fullest confidence. +He knows that history has given the most magnificent justification +to the Catholic principle of authority. Opinions have +come and gone, systems were born and have died, thrones +of learning rose and fell; only one towering mental structure +remained standing upon the rock of God-founded authority in +the vast field of ruins with its wrecks of human wisdom. And +its ancient Credo, prayed by all nations, is the same Credo once +prayed by the martyrs. +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='398'/><anchor id='Pg398'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Chapter II. Theology And University.</head> + +<p> +<q>He is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our +doings</q>; thus spoke in bygone ages the children of +this world. <q>Let us therefore lie in wait for the just.... +He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God and calleth +himself the Son of God</q> (Wisdom ii, 12 <hi rend='italic'>seq.</hi>). Centuries +later the children of the world treated in the same manner +God's Son and His doctrine. And in these days, when the +science of the faith is to be driven from the rooms of the +school, let us recall that in olden times the children of the +world planned similarly. +</p> + +<p> +In the days when the private and public life of Europe's +nations was permeated with the Christian faith, and their ideas +were still centred in God and eternity, then the science of +the faith was held to be the highest among the sciences, not only +by rank but in fact. +</p> + +<p> +And when, in the budding desire for knowledge, they erected +universities, the first and largest of them, Paris University, +was to be the pre-eminent home of theology, and wherever theology +joined with the other sciences it received first honours. Thus +it was in the days of yore, and for a long time. The secular tendency +of modern thought led to the gradual emancipation of science +from religion; unavoidably, its aversion for a supernatural +view of the world soon turned against, and demanded the removal +of, the science representing that view. Reasons for the +demand were soon found. Thus the removal of theology from +the university has become part and parcel of the system of ideas +of the unbelieving modern man; the liberal press exploits the +idea whenever occasion offers. Resolutions to this effect are introduced +in parliaments and diets, meetings of young students +<pb n='399'/><anchor id='Pg399'/> +are echoing the ideas heard elsewhere. No wonder that the Portuguese +revolution of 1910 had nothing more urgent to do than +to close the theological faculty at Portugal's only university. +</p> + +<p> +What are the <emph>reasons</emph> advanced? Many are advanced; the +main reason is usually disguised; we shall treat of it when concluding. +In the first place we are again met by the old tune +of free science, which has been in our ears so long; the rooms +of the colleges, it is said, are destined for a research which seeks +truth with an undimmed eye, and not for blindfolded science +confined to a prescribed path. +</p> + +<p> +No need to waste words on this. Just one more reference +may be permitted us, namely, to the study of law. There is +hardly another science with less latitude than the science of law. +Its task is not to doubt the justification of state laws, but to +look upon constitutions and statutes as established, to explain +them, and by doing so to train efficient officials and administrators +of the law. When explaining the civil code the teacher of +law has small opportunity for pursuing <q>free search after +truth</q>; neither will his pupil be tested at examinations in the +maxims of a free research that accepts no tradition; he will +have to prove his knowledge of the matter that had been given +to him. Yet no one has ever objected to the teaching of jurisprudence +at the university. Therefore the objection cannot be +valid that theology is restricted to the established doctrines of +its religion and has to transmit them without change to its +future servants. It should be borne in mind that our universities +are not intended for research only, but also, and chiefly, for +training candidates for the professions. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +This disposes at the same time of the objection that theology has +to serve ecclesiastical purposes outside of and foreign to science. Religious +science, like any other science, serves the desire that strives for +truth. True, it serves also for the practical training of the clergyman +for his vocation. But shall we eliminate from science the interests of +practical life? Then medicine and legal science would also have to +be excluded, and for these there would be planted only sterile theories, +and the universities transformed into a place of abstract intellectualism. +</p> + +<p> +Again it is argued that religion and faith are not really cognition +and knowledge, but only the products of sentiment, and hence theology +has no claim to a place among the sciences; that religion can +only be a subject for psychology which lays bare its roots in the human +<pb n='400'/><anchor id='Pg400'/> +heart, and a subject for the history of religion, to trace its historical +forms and to study its laws of evolution—sciences which belong to the +philosophical faculty. +</p> + +<p> +Thus we come back to the principles of an erroneous theory +of knowledge. No need to demonstrate again that the Christian belief +is built upon the clear perception of reason, and that it is not a sentimental +but a rational function. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +But has not the Church her theological seminaries? Let +theology seek refuge there! We answer the Church herself desires +this; she does not like theological faculties, they are in her +eyes a danger to the faith. +</p> + +<p> +Now, <emph>if</emph> the Church would be deprived of her authoritative +influence upon the appointment of professors at theological +faculties and upon the subject of their teachings, consequently, +<emph>if</emph> there would be jeopardized the purity of belief of the candidates +for priesthood, and through them of the people, then, we +admit, the Church would rather forego theological faculties at +state-universities. This could not be done without considerable +injury to the public prestige of the Church, to her contact with +worldly sciences and their representatives and disciples, even to +the scientific study of theology. In the latter particularly by +the loss of the greater resources of the state, and by the absence +of inducement to scientific aim, which is more urgent for theologians +than for others at college. Neither would the state +escape injury, because of the open slight and harm to religion, +and of lessening its contact with the most influential body +in Christian countries. But if the Church is assured of her +proper influence on the faculties, she has no reason for an unfriendly +attitude toward them. The object the Church seeks to +achieve in her seminaries is the clerical education of her candidates, +their ascetic training, the introduction into a life of recollection +and prayer, into an order of life befitting priests; this +cannot be sufficiently done in the free life at the university. +</p> + +<p> +This is not a bar to scientific instruction by the theological +faculty. Seminary and faculty supplement one another. We +see very frequently, at Rome and outside of Rome, the theological +school separated from the seminary with the approval of +the Church. But all these objections do not give the real reason, +the roots lie deeper. +</p> + +<pb n='401'/><anchor id='Pg401'/> + +<p> +When the Divine Founder of our Religion stood before the +tribunal of Judea He said: <q>My kingdom is not of this world: +if my kingdom were of this world, servants would strive for me.</q> +This was the whole explanation of why He stood there accused. +The guardian of the doctrine of her Master may use these words +to explain the fact that, in the eyes of many, she stands to-day +accused and defamed. The mind of modern man has forsaken +the world of the Divine and Eternal; no longer is he a servant +of this kingdom. His ideals are not God and Heaven, but he +himself and this world; not the service of God, but human rights +and human dignity. This view of the world, which cannot +grasp the wisdom of Jesus Christ, and which takes offence at +the Cross, also takes offence at a science that confesses as the +loftiest ideal <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Jesum Christum, et hunc crucifixum</foreign>. +</p> + +<p> +The real kernel of the question is: Does the Christian +religion in its entirety still serve the purpose of to-day—or +does it not? is it to remain with us, the religion wherein our +fathers found the gratification of their highest mental aims, +the religion that gave Europe its civilization and culture, that +created its superior mental life, and still rules it to this hour? +Or shall religion be expelled by a return to a heathendom which +Christianity had overthrown? <q>We do not want Him to rule +over us</q>—there is the real reason for the modern antipathy +to Catholic theology. Else, whence the excited demand for its +removal? Because it is superfluous? Even if this were the +fact, there is many a category of officials, the little need of +which can be demonstrated without difficulty, yet no one grows +excited about it; many expenditures by the state are rather +superfluous, yet there is no indignation. No, the matter at issue +is not so much the scientific character of theology, nor misgivings +about its progress or its freedom; the real question is +this: +</p> + +<div> +<head>Do we Desire to Remain Christians?</head> + +<p> +For <emph>if</emph> we still recognize the Christian religion as the standard +for our thought, <emph>if</emph> we are persuaded that it must remain the +foundation of our life, then there can be no doubt that its facts, +its truths, and standards of life require scientific presentation; +<pb n='402'/><anchor id='Pg402'/> +then it cannot be disputed that this science is entitled to a place +alongside of the science of law, of chemistry, or Indology. Indeed, +then it must assume the first place in the system of sciences. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Surely a science ranks the higher, the higher its object and its +sources, the surer its results, and the greater its significance for the +most exalted aim of mankind. The subject of theology is God and His +works, the ultimate causes of all things in God's eternal plan of the +universe, the <q>wisdom of God in a mystery, a wisdom which is hidden, +which God ordained before the world, unto our glory</q> (1 Cor. ii. 7). +Therefore it is wisdom; for <q>the science of things divine is science +proper</q> (Augustinus, De Trinit. xii, 14). A science, having as its +subject Greek architecture, geography, or physical law, may claim +respect, yet it must step back before a science of Religion, that rises +to the highest sphere of truth by a power of flight that participates in +the omniscience of the Holy Ghost; for such is the faith. For this +reason its results, in so far as they rest on faith, are more certain than +the results of all other sciences. +</p> + +<p> +Finally, the aims of life which theology serves are not physical health +or advantages in the external life, but the knowledge of God, the spread +of His kingdom on earth, and the eternal goal of all human life. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +So long as the Christian religion is the valued possession of +the people of a country, and the roots of their lives rest more in +Christianity than in mathematics, astrophysics, or Egyptology, +so long is the science of religion entitled to a seat at the hearth +of the sciences; and the people, then, have the right to demand +that the servants of religion get their education at the place +where the other leading professions get their training. If the +state considers it its duty to train teachers of history and physics +for the benefit of its citizen, then it is still more its duty to help +in the education of the servants of religion, who are called upon +to care for more important interests of the people and state than +all the rest of the professions. Let us consider the task of universities. +As established in the countries of central Europe, they are +destined to foster science in the widest sense, and to educate the +leading professions: to be the hearth for the sum total of mental +endeavour, this is their vocation; hence all things that contain +truth and have educational value should join hands here. To +eliminate the science of the highest sphere of knowledge would be +tantamount to a mutilation of the university. Here all boughs +and branches of human knowledge should be united into a large +organism, of unity and community of work, of giving and taking +<pb n='403'/><anchor id='Pg403'/> +Theology needs for auxiliaries other sciences, such as profane +history and philology, Assyriology and Egyptology, psychology +and medicine. In turn it offers indispensable aid to history +and other branches of science, it guards the ethical and ideal +principles of every science, and crowns them by tendering to +them the most exalted thoughts. Here is the place of education +for the judge and official, for the physician and teacher; hence +it should be the place also for the education of the servant of +the chief spiritual power, religion. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +The university should unite all active mental powers that lift man +above the commonplace. But is there any stronger mental power than +religion? +</p> + +<p> +It is the oldest and mightiest factor in mental life; it is as natural +to man as the flower is to the field; his mind gravitates to a religious +resting place, whence he may view time and eternity, where he may rest. +Therefore religion demands a science that inquires into its substance, its +justification, its effect on thought and life. Man strives to give to himself +an account of everything, but most of all of what is foremost in +his mind. A system of sciences without theology would be like an uncompleted +tower, like a body without a head. +</p> + +<p> +The history of theology dates back to the very beginning of science and +culture. If we trace the oldest philosophy we find as its starting point +theological research and knowledge. <hi rend='italic'>Orpheus</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Hesiod</hi>, who sang of +the gods, and the sages of the oldest mysteries, were called theologians; +<hi rend='italic'>Plutarch</hi> sees in the theologians of past ages the oldest philosophers, in +the philosophers, however, the descendants of the theologians; <hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi> +derives philosophy from the teachers of theology. Even more prominently +was religious study and knowledge responsible for Hindoo, Chaldean, +and Egyptian philosophy. +</p> + +<p> +Was it reserved for our age to discard all the better traditions of +mankind? Shall victory rest with the destructive elements in the mental +education of Europe? Against this danger to our ideal goods, theology +should stay at the universities, as a bulwark and permanent +protest. +</p> + +</quote> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Theological Faculty in State and Church.</head> + +<p> +For this reason the theological faculty has a birth-right at +the university, whether state school or free university. Where +it is joined to a state university, theology automatically +becomes subordinate to the state, in a limited sense. More +essential is its dependency upon the Church, because, being the +science of the faith, theology is primarily subject to the authority +and supervision of the Church. For the Church, and only +<pb n='404'/><anchor id='Pg404'/> +the Church, is charged by its Divine Founder to teach His +religion to all nations. Hence no one can exercise the office of +a religious teacher, neither in the public school nor at college, if +not authorized to do so by the Church. It is a participation +in the ministry of the Church; and the latter alone can designate +its organs. Whoever has not been given by the Church +such license to teach, or he from whom she takes it away, +does not possess it; no other power can grant it, not even +the state. Nor can the state restore the license of teaching to +a theologian from whom the Church has withdrawn it; this +would be an act beyond state jurisdiction, hence invalid. +</p> + +<p> +In granting the license to teach, the Church does so in the +self-evident presumption that the one so licensed will teach his +students the correct doctrine of the Church, as far as it has +been established; and he binds himself to do so by voluntarily +taking the office, and more explicitly by the profession of the +creed. If he should deviate from the creed later on, it is the +obvious right of the Church to cancel his license. In this +the Church only draws the logical conclusion from the office +of the teacher and from his voluntary obligation. He holds +his office as an organ of the Church, destined to lecture on +pure doctrine before future priests. Whether or not he has +honestly searched for the truth when deviating therefrom, this +he may settle with his conscience; but he is incapacitated to act +still further as an organ of the Church, and it is only common +honesty to resign his office if he cannot fulfil any longer the +obligations he assumed. The professor of theology is therefore +in the first place a deputy of his Church. Also he is teacher at +a state institution and as such a state official; he is appointed +by the state to be the teacher of students belonging to a +certain denomination, he is paid by the state, and may be +removed by the state from his position as official teacher. But +withal the right must not be denied to the Church to watch over +the correctness of the Christian doctrine, and to make appointment +and continuance in the teaching office dependent upon it. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> + +<p> +Indeed, this demand was urged by Prof. <hi rend='italic'>Paulsen</hi>, notwithstanding +his entirely different position: he says: <q>The Catholic-theological +faculties are in a certain sense a concession by the Church to the +<pb n='405'/><anchor id='Pg405'/> +state; of course they are also a service of the state for the Church, and +a valuable one, too; but they rest in the first place upon a concession +made by the Church to the state, with a view to the historically established +fact, and to peace. Naturally, this concession cannot be unconditional. +The condition is: the professors appointed by the state +must stand upon ecclesiastical ground, they must acknowledge the doctrine +of the Church as the standard of their teaching, and they must +receive from the Church the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>missio canonica</foreign>. The Church cannot accept +hostile scientists for teachers. Hence for the appointment an +agreement must be reached with ecclesiastical authority. The universities +are not merely workshops for research, they are at the same time +educational institutions for important public professions; in fact, they +were founded for this latter purpose: they are the outcome of the want +for scientifically educated clergymen, teachers, physicians, judges, and +other professionals. And this purpose necessitates restrictions: the +professor of Evangelical theology cannot teach arbitrary opinions any +more than his Catholic fellow-professor can; the lawyer is also restricted +by presumptions, for instance, that the civil code is not +an accumulation of nonsense, but, on the whole, a pretty good order +of life. Just as little as we should dispute the lawyer's standing as a +scientist on this account, so little shall we be able to deny this standing +to the Catholic theologian who stands with honest conviction on the +platform of his Church.</q> <q>We want the Catholic theological faculties +to be preserved; of course, under the presumption of freedom of scientific +research within the limits drawn by the creed of the Church.</q> +</p> + +<p> +In a similar sense the Bavarian minister of education, Dr. <hi rend='italic'>V. +Wehner</hi>, said, on Feb. 11, 1908, in the course of a speech in the Bavarian +Diet: <q>Thus the Catholic professor of theology is bound to the standards +of creed and morals as established by the Church. The decision as +to whether a Catholic professor of theology teaches the right doctrine of +the Church is not for the state to give, but for the Church alone.</q> +<q>The business of the professors at theological faculties is to transmit +the teachings of the Church to future candidates for the priesthood, +and this is what they are employed for by the state. That the +Church does not tolerate a doctrine to differ from her own is to me +quite self-evident.</q> Hence we may conclude, <q>The attacks directed +here and there in recent times against the continuance of Catholic +theological faculties need not worry us in any way. Nor are they likely +to meet with response at the places where the decision rests. Times +have changed. Even non-Catholic governments are no longer blind to +the conviction that an educated clergy must be reckoned among the most +eminent factors for conserving the state</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Freiherr von Hertling</hi>). +Even during the heated debates on the anti-modernist oath in the Prussian +Diet and upper house, the importance of the theological faculties +was acknowledged by the speakers, none of whom demanded the removal +of these faculties, though outspoken in their criticism of the +oath. Prime minister <hi rend='italic'>Bethmann-Hollweg</hi> declared on March 7: <q>Catholic +students will get their training at the Catholic faculties the same +as hitherto, even after the anti-modernist oath is introduced. The state +never will claim for itself the authority to determine in any way +<pb n='406'/><anchor id='Pg406'/> +which, and in what, forms doctrines of faith shall be taught to Catholic +students. This is no affair of the state. If, and this is my wish, the +Catholic faculties will retain that value to teachers, students, and the +total organism of the universities, which is the natural condition of +their existence, then they will continue to exist for the profit of both, +the Catholic population and the state. Should they lose this value, +however, an event I do not wish to see, then they will die by themselves. +But I do not see that it is demanded by the interest of the state to +abolish without awaiting further development these faculties with one +stroke, thereby harming our Catholic population, whose wants and +needs deserve as much consideration as those of any other part of the +population.</q> +</p> + +<p> +There is no warrant for the view that theology is subject to a foreign +power, and therefore it cannot claim a place in a state institution. +In its external relations the theological faculty is subject also to the +state, serving the public interests so much the better the more continually +the priest by his activity influences the life of the people. By the +way, why this urgent demand for state control in the pursuit of a science +by a party that otherwise is striving zealously to put the university +beyond the influence of the state? To be a state institution or not can +only be an extrinsic matter to the university itself. Or has the +science of medicine not enough intellectual substance and consistency +to thrive at a free university? Is science as such a matter of +state? Therefore, why find fault with theology because it will not be entirely +subordinated to the state? Nor is it proper to call the Church a +<q>foreign</q> power. It is certainly not a foreign power to theology; +neither to the Christian state, that has developed in closest relation to +the Church, which owes its civilization and culture to the Church, +shares with her its subjects, and is based even to-day upon the doctrines +and customs of the Church. +</p> + +</quote> + +<p> +Against Christ there arose the Jewish scribes and denounced +His wisdom as error; the scribes have passed away, we know +them no longer. To the Neoplatonics Christianity was ignorance, +even barbarity; Manicheans and Gnostics praised as +the higher wisdom Oriental and Greek philosophy adorned +with Christian ideas. They belong to history. When the people +of Israel came in touch with the brilliant civilization of Egypt, +Assyria, and Greece, they often became ashamed of the religion +of their forefathers, and embraced false gods; to-day we look +upon their fancy of inferiority as foolishness, and we rank their +religion high above the religious notions of the pagan Orient. +</p> + +<p> +Thus has truth pursued its way through the centuries of +human history, often unrecognized by the children of men, +scolded for being obsolete, nay, more, driven from its home and +<pb n='407'/><anchor id='Pg407'/> +forced to make room for delusion and error. Delusion fled, +and error sank into its grave—but truth remained. Thus the +Church has endured, and thus the Church will live on, with her +doctrines and science misunderstood and repulsed by the children +of a world unable to grasp them; they will pass away and +so will their thoughts, yet the Church will remain, and so will +her science. <q>She was great and respected</q>—this is the +familiar quotation from a Protestant historian—<q>before the +Saxon had set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the +Rhine, when Grecian eloquence still nourished in Antioch, when +idols were still worshipped in the temple of Mecca. And she +may still exist in undiminished vigor when some traveller from +New Zealand shall, in the midst of a vast solitude, take his stand +on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of +St. Paul's</q> (<hi rend='italic'>Lord Macaulay</hi>). +</p> + +<p> +Then, perhaps, another observer, leaning against the pillars +of history, and looking back upon the culture of this age, will +realize that only one power of truth may rightly say: <q>Heaven +and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away</q>—Christ +and His Church. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<head>Law and Freedom. An Epilogue.</head> + +<p> +The great Renovator of mankind, in whom the pious Christian +sees his God, and in whom the greater part of the modern +world, though turned from faith, still sees the ideal of a perfect +human being, hence also of true freedom, once spoke the significant +words: <q><foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Et veritas liberabit vos</foreign>, and the truth shall make +you free</q> (John viii. 32). As all the words that fell from His +lips are the truth for all centuries to come, so are these words +pre-eminently true. +</p> + +<p> +There is in our times a strong tension felt between freedom on +the one hand, and law and authority on the other; true freedom +and true worth it sees too exclusively in the independent assertion +of the self-will, and in the unrestrained manifestation of +one's strength and energy, while law and authority are looked +upon as onerous fetters. Our times do not understand that freedom +<pb n='408'/><anchor id='Pg408'/> +and human dignity are not opposed to law and obedience, +that no other freedom can be intended for man than the +voluntary compliance with the law and the standards of order. +</p> + +<p> +All creatures, from the smallest to the largest, are bound by +law; none is destined for the eminent isolation of independence. +The same law of gravitation that causes the stone to fall, also +governs the giants of the skies, and they obey its rule; the +same laws that rule the candle-flame, that are at work in the +drop of water, also rule the fires of the sun and guide the +fates of the ocean. The heart, like all other organs of the human +body, is ruled by laws, and medical science, with its institutes and +methods, is kept busy to cure the consequences of the disturbance +of these laws. Every being has its laws: it must follow +them to attain perfection; deviation leads to degeneration. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the decision of the worth and dignity of man does not +rest with an unrestrained display of strength, but with order; +not with unchecked activity, but with control of his acts and +with truth. The floods that break through the dam have force +and energy, but being without order they create destruction; +the avalanche crashing down the mountain side has force +and power, but, free from the law of order, it carries devastation; +glowing metal when led into the mould becomes a magnificent +bell, while flowing lava brings ruin. Only <emph>one</emph> dignity +and freedom can be destined for man, it consists in voluntarily +adhering to warranted laws and authorities. +</p> + +<p> +For him who with conviction and free decision has made the +law of thought, faith, and action his own principle, the law has +ceased to be a yoke and a burden; it has become his own standard +of life, which he loves; it has become the fruit of his +conviction, <emph>truth</emph> has made him free. Ask the virtuoso who +obeys the rules of his art whether he considers them fetters; +indeed he does not, he has made them his principles. Let us +ask of the civilized citizen whether he feels the laws of civilization +to be a yoke; he does not, he obeys them of his own free +will, they are his own order of life. Unfree, slaves and serfs, +will be those only who carry with resentment the burden of the +laws they must obey. Unfree feels the savage people fighting +against the laws of civilization; unfree the wicked boy to whom +<pb n='409'/><anchor id='Pg409'/> +discipline is repugnant. It is not the law that makes man unfree, +it is his own lawlessness and rebellion. +</p> + +<p> +Nor does submission to the God-given law of the Christian +belief make man low or unfree; to those to whom their belief +is conviction and life, the suggestion that they are oppressed +will sound strange. On the contrary, they feel that this belief +fits in harmoniously with the nobler impulses of their thought +and will, like the pearl in the shell, like the gem in its +setting. Man experiences this when his belief lifts him above the +lowlands of his sensual life to mental independence, and frees +him from the bondage of his own unruly impulses, that so often +seek to control him. +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l>Freiheit sei der Zweck des Zwanges</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Wie man eine Rebe bindet,</l> +<l>Dass sie, statt im Staub zu kriechen,</l> +<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Frei sich in die Lüfte windet.</l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +(Freedom be the aim of restraint, just as the vine is tied to +the trellis that it may freely rise in the air, instead of crawling +in the dust.) This is the freedom of mind, knowing but one +yoke, the truth; the freedom that does not bow to error, nor to +high sounding phrases, nor to public opinion, nor to the bondage +of political life; neither is true freedom shackled by the +fetters of one's own lawless impulses. <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>Et veritas liberabit +vos.</foreign> +</p> + +</div> + +</div> + +</div> + +<pb n='411'/><anchor id='Pg411'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Index.</head> + +<lg> +<l>Accusations of the Church, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Achievements of liberal research, <ref target='Pg291'>291</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Adickes, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg092'>92</ref>, <ref target='Pg264'>264</ref>, <ref target='Pg269'>269</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Agnosticism, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref>, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref>, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Amira, K. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref>, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>, <ref target='Pg309'>309</ref>, <ref target='Pg326'>326</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ampère, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Anthropocentric view of the world, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Apponyi, A., Count</hi>, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Arago</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Aristotle</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg005'>5</ref>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg052'>52</ref>, <ref target='Pg345'>345</ref>, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Arnest, Archbishop</hi>, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Atheism, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref>, <ref target='Pg079'>79</ref>, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Augustine, St.</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>, <ref target='Pg076'>76</ref>, <ref target='Pg080'>80</ref>, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref>, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg260'>260</ref>, <ref target='Pg273'>273</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Authority of Faith, <ref target='Pg081'>81</ref>, <ref target='Pg112'>112</ref>, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— private, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref></l> +<l>—— Protestant, <ref target='Pg397'>397</ref></l> +<l>—— rejection of, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref>, <ref target='Pg040'>40</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Autonomism, <ref target='Pg025'>25</ref>, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Autonomy of the College, <ref target='Pg360'>360</ref></l> +<l>—— of Reason, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref></l> +<l>—— of the Teacher, <ref target='Pg361'>361</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Autotheism, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bacon, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref>, <ref target='Pg216'>216</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Baer, M. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Balmes, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Barrande</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Baumgarten, O.</hi>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg254'>254</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Baur, F. Ch.</hi>, <ref target='Pg258'>258</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Beaumont, L. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bebel</hi>, <ref target='Pg350'>350</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Becker, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bellarmin, Cardinal</hi>, <ref target='Pg185'>185</ref>, <ref target='Pg192'>192</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Benedict XIV.</hi>, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Berkeley</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bernouilli</hi>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bertholon</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bertrin, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg247'>247</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Berzelius, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bessel, F. W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bethmann-Hollweg</hi>, <ref target='Pg394'>394</ref>, <ref target='Pg405'>405</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bible, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref>, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Bible-Criticism, modern, <ref target='Pg254'>254</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Billroth, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Biot, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bischof, K. G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Boissarie, Dr.</hi>, <ref target='Pg247'>247</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Boniface VIII.</hi>, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bornhak, C.</hi>, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Boscovich</hi>, <ref target='Pg197'>197</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bourdaloue</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Bousset, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg254'>254</ref>, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Boyle, Robert</hi>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Brahe, Tycho de</hi>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Branco, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Brass, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg333'>333</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Braun, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref>, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref>, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Brewster, D.</hi>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Broda, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Büchner</hi>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Buckland, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Buffon, G. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cabet, Etienne</hi>, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cantor, M.</hi>, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Caprivi</hi>, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cardinals, <ref target='Pg098'>98</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Carneri, B.</hi>, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cassirer</hi>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Catholic, not free in research, <ref target='Pg108'>108</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Catholic Universities, <ref target='Pg370'>370</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cauchy</hi>, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Causation, Natural, <ref target='Pg034'>34</ref>, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Certainty, scientific, <ref target='Pg137'>137</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Censorship of Books, civil, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>—— ecclesiastical, <ref target='Pg171'>171</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Chamberlain, H. St.</hi>, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref>, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref>, <ref target='Pg361'>361</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Charles Borromeo, St.</hi>, <ref target='Pg175'>175</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='412'/><anchor id='Pg412'/> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cherbury, Herbert of</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Chevreul, M. E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Christ, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref>, <ref target='Pg143'>143</ref>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg401'>401</ref>, <ref target='Pg407'>407</ref></l> +<l>—— Divinity denied, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Christian Religion, State Protection for, <ref target='Pg352'>352</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Truths, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref></l> +<l>—— View of the World, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref>, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Christianity, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref></l> +<l>—— compared with Paganism, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref></l> +<l>—— free, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref></l> +<l>—— Origin of, <ref target='Pg259'>259</ref></l> +<l>—— <hi rend='italic'>vs.</hi> Paganism, <ref target='Pg253'>253</ref></l> +<l>—— without Christ, <ref target='Pg252'>252</ref>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Church, the, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref>, <ref target='Pg039'>39</ref>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg070'>70</ref>, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref>, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref>, <ref target='Pg275'>275</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Accusations of the, <ref target='Pg142'>142</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— and Medical Science, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref></l> +<l>—— Catholic, alone enduring, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref></l> +<l>—— Episcopal, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref></l> +<l>—— founder of Schools and Universities, <ref target='Pg145'>145</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— not a foreign Power, <ref target='Pg406'>406</ref></l> +<l>—— the Mother of Civilization, <ref target='Pg145'>145</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cicero</hi>, <ref target='Pg003'>3</ref>, <ref target='Pg008'>8</ref>, <ref target='Pg138'>138</ref>, <ref target='Pg269'>269</ref>, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Claar</hi>, M., <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Clement IV.</hi>, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Clement V.</hi>, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Clement VIII.</hi>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cognition, human, <ref target='Pg034'>34</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>College Professors, <ref target='Pg393'>393</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Columbus, Christopher</hi>, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Communistic Experiments, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Congregations, Roman, <ref target='Pg098'>98</ref>, <ref target='Pg189'>189</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Copernican System, <ref target='Pg183'>183</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Copernicus, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg113'>113</ref>, <ref target='Pg174'>174</ref>, <ref target='Pg184'>184</ref>, <ref target='Pg186'>186</ref>, <ref target='Pg189'>189</ref>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg200'>200</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Coppée, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg324'>324</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Corneille</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cornu</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Cosmogonies, of Nations, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Council, Fourth Lateran, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Council, Vatican, <ref target='Pg068'>68</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref>, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref>, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>, <ref target='Pg130'>130</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Craniotomy, <ref target='Pg102'>102</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Creation, disputed, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Criticism of the Gospels, modern, <ref target='Pg254'>254</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cuvier, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Cyril, St., of Alexandria</hi>, <ref target='Pg087'>87</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dalberg, J. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dana, J. Dwight</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Darwin</hi>, <ref target='Pg107'>107</ref>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg157'>157</ref>, <ref target='Pg239'>239</ref>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref></l> +<l>—— an Agnostic, <ref target='Pg222'>222</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Davy, Sir H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dawson, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dechristianizing of the modern State, <ref target='Pg362'>362</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Delitzsch, Fr.</hi>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Deluc, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Denifle, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref>, <ref target='Pg153'>153</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Denthofen</hi>, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Descartes, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref>, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dilthey, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Divinity of Christ, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref></l> +<l>—— denied, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dogmas, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>, <ref target='Pg067'>67</ref>, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Döllinger</hi>, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Draper, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg144'>144</ref>, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref>, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Drews, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Dualism, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref>, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Du Bois-Reymond</hi>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref>, <ref target='Pg237'>237</ref>, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dumas, J. B.</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Dumont, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Economics, liberal, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Egger, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ehrenberg, Ch.</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ehrenfels, Chr. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg347'>347</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Eichhorn, Minister</hi>, <ref target='Pg344'>344</ref>, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Emancipation from the Truth, <ref target='Pg041'>41</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Eméry</hi>, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Epinois, de l'</hi>, <ref target='Pg183'>183</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Episcopal Church, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Erdmann, J. E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Error, Danger of Infection by, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref></l> +<l>—— to be taught with same right as truth? <ref target='Pg328'>328</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Ethics, modern, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>, <ref target='Pg325'>325</ref>, <ref target='Pg330'>330</ref>, <ref target='Pg347'>347</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Eucken, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>, <ref target='Pg244'>244</ref>, <ref target='Pg294'>294</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Euler</hi>, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Evolution, Theory of, <ref target='Pg049'>49</ref>, <ref target='Pg157'>157</ref>, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Theory, held by Catholic Scientists, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='413'/><anchor id='Pg413'/> + +<lg> +<l>Faith, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref></l> +<l>—— and Reason, <ref target='Pg073'>73</ref></l> +<l>—— Authority of, <ref target='Pg061'>61</ref>, <ref target='Pg081'>81</ref></l> +<l>—— Definition of, <ref target='Pg061'>61</ref>, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>, <ref target='Pg066'>66</ref></l> +<l>—— Doubts forbidden, <ref target='Pg139'>139</ref></l> +<l>—— its scientific Demonstration, <ref target='Pg130'>130</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Motive of, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref></l> +<l>—— not blind, <ref target='Pg061'>61</ref>, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref></l> +<l>—— Obedience of, and Freedom of Action, <ref target='Pg105'>105</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Falkenberg, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Faraday, M.</hi>, <ref target='Pg214'>214</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref>, <ref target='Pg249'>249</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Favaro, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg183'>183</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fénélon</hi>, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Feuerbach, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fichte, J. G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg052'>52</ref>, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref>, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>, <ref target='Pg394'>394</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fischer, Kuno</hi>, <ref target='Pg037'>37</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fizeau, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Foerster, F. W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg128'>128</ref>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg268'>268</ref>, <ref target='Pg338'>338</ref>, <ref target='Pg345'>345</ref>, <ref target='Pg390'>390</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fonck, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fonsegrive, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg039'>39</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Forel, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg325'>325</ref>, <ref target='Pg347'>347</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Foucault, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fouillie, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg290'>290</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Francé, R. H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Francis of Sales, St.</hi>, <ref target='Pg175'>175</ref>, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Franklin, B.</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Frauenhofer</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Frederick II., King</hi>, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Freedom, Definition of, <ref target='Pg008'>8</ref>, <ref target='Pg016'>16</ref></l> +<l>—— for the Truth, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref></l> +<l>—— modern Idea of, <ref target='Pg016'>16</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg018'>18</ref>, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref></l> +<l>—— of Art, <ref target='Pg336'>336</ref></l> +<l>—— of Research, different from Freedom of Teaching, <ref target='Pg009'>9</ref></l> +<l>—— of Research, liberal, <ref target='Pg229'>229</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— of Science, Necessity, <ref target='Pg012'>12</ref></l> +<l>—— —— Subject to human Nature, <ref target='Pg361'>361</ref></l> +<l>—— of Teaching, as understood in the Past, <ref target='Pg344'>344</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg370'>370</ref></l> +<l>—— —— Danger of, admitted by modern Scientists, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref></l> +<l>—— —— Definition of, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref></l> +<l>—— —— unrestricted, inadmissible, <ref target='Pg314'>314</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Freedom of Thought, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref>, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref></l> +<l>—— two Kinds of, <ref target='Pg013'>13</ref>, <ref target='Pg015'>15</ref>, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Freemasons, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg331'>331</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Free-religionists, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Free-thinkers, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref>, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>, <ref target='Pg291'>291</ref>, <ref target='Pg331'>331</ref>, <ref target='Pg332'>332</ref>, <ref target='Pg345'>345</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fresnel, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Friedwald</hi>, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Frins, V.</hi>, <ref target='Pg165'>165</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Fuchs, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Galileo</hi>, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref>, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>, <ref target='Pg101'>101</ref>, <ref target='Pg102'>102</ref>, <ref target='Pg180'>180</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Galle, J. G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg208'>208</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Galvani, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref>, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gassendi, P.</hi>, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gauss, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref>, <ref target='Pg210'>210</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gebler, K. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg183'>183</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Generatio aequivoca, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Genesis, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref></l> +<l>—— Doctrine of, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref></l> +<l>—— History or Legend? <ref target='Pg259'>259</ref></l> +<l>—— primordial, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gerdil</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gibbons, Cardinal</hi>, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Giese, T.</hi>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Giesebrecht, F. W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>God, <ref target='Pg006'>6</ref>, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref>, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref>, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>, <ref target='Pg032'>32</ref>, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>, <ref target='Pg053'>53</ref>, <ref target='Pg065'>65</ref>, <ref target='Pg176'>176</ref>, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref>, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref>, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref>, <ref target='Pg387'>387</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>God's Order of Life, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Goethe</hi>, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref>, <ref target='Pg269'>269</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Goetz, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg165'>165</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Gospels, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref></l> +<l>—— modern Criticism of, <ref target='Pg254'>254</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Government, founded on Christianity, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Goyau, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Grace, divine, Definition of, <ref target='Pg073'>73</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gray, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gregory VII.</hi>, <ref target='Pg145'>145</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gregory IX.</hi>, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gregory XI.</hi>, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Grienberger</hi>, <ref target='Pg185'>185</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Grimaldi, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Grisar, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref>, <ref target='Pg197'>197</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Grosse, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Grotthuss, von</hi>, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Guldin</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Gunkel, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg259'>259</ref>, <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Günther, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='414'/><anchor id='Pg414'/> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Häckel, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg087'>87</ref>, <ref target='Pg114'>114</ref>, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref>, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref>, <ref target='Pg222'>222</ref>, <ref target='Pg239'>239</ref>, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref>, <ref target='Pg268'>268</ref>, <ref target='Pg303'>303</ref>, <ref target='Pg325'>325</ref></l> +<l>——— denounced for Forgery, <ref target='Pg333'>333</ref></l> +<l>——— on Lourdes, <ref target='Pg247'>247</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Haeser</hi>, <ref target='Pg154'>154</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Haller, A. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Halley</hi>, E., <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hansen, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg325'>325</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Harnack, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref>, <ref target='Pg134'>134</ref>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg256'>256</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg265'>265</ref>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref>, <ref target='Pg284'>284</ref>, <ref target='Pg382'>382</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hartmann, E. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref>, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref>, <ref target='Pg290'>290</ref>, <ref target='Pg317'>317</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Harvard University, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Harvey, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hauy, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Heer, O.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hefele, K. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hegel</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref>, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>, <ref target='Pg294'>294</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Heis, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Helmholtz, H. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg215'>215</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Henslow, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg216'>216</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Herbart</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hermes, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Herrmann, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg076'>76</ref>, <ref target='Pg078'>78</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Herschel</hi>, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hertwig, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hertz</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hettner, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref>, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hilgers, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref>, <ref target='Pg169'>169</ref>, <ref target='Pg176'>176</ref>, <ref target='Pg177'>177</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>His, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg333'>333</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Historian, the Catholic, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>History, and the Faith, <ref target='Pg093'>93</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hitchcock</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hoensbroech, P.</hi>, <ref target='Pg165'>165</ref>, <ref target='Pg169'>169</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hoff, van't</hi>, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Holl, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Holtzmann, O.</hi>, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Honorius III.</hi>, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref>, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hörnes, M.</hi>, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Huber, V. A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg148'>148</ref>, <ref target='Pg324'>324</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Humanists, <ref target='Pg018'>18</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Humanitarian Religion, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref></l> +<l>—— View of Life, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Humanity, emancipated, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Human race, Origin of, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Humboldt, A. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Humboldt, W. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref>, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref>, <ref target='Pg314'>314</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hume, D.</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Huxley, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg222'>222</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Huygens, Chr.</hi>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref>, <ref target='Pg204'>204</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Hyrtl, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Illuminati, <ref target='Pg025'>25</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Immorality, among College Men, <ref target='Pg335'>335</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Inclinations, human, <ref target='Pg264'>264</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Incompatibility of Science and Faith, <ref target='Pg198'>198</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Index of forbidden Books, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref>, <ref target='Pg169'>169</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg189'>189</ref>, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Individualism, <ref target='Pg025'>25</ref>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Infallibility, <ref target='Pg076'>76</ref>, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Innocent IV.</hi>, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Innocent VI.</hi>, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>James, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>, <ref target='Pg268'>268</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Janssen, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>, <ref target='Pg149'>149</ref>, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>, <ref target='Pg156'>156</ref>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Jesuit Order, <ref target='Pg183'>183</ref>, <ref target='Pg359'>359</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Jesus Christ, <ref target='Pg252'>252</ref>, <ref target='Pg357'>357</ref></l> +<l>—— Existence of, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +<l>—— who was? <ref target='Pg281'>281</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Jews, <ref target='Pg128'>128</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Joachim, G.</hi> (see <ref target='Index-Rheticus'><hi rend='italic'>Rheticus</hi></ref>)</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Jodl, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref>, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>, <ref target='Pg066'>66</ref>, <ref target='Pg123'>123</ref>, <ref target='Pg130'>130</ref>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref>, <ref target='Pg245'>245</ref>, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref>, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref>, <ref target='Pg322'>322</ref>, <ref target='Pg357'>357</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>John XXII.</hi>, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Jones, Dr. Spencer</hi>, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Jörgensen</hi>, <ref target='Pg229'>229</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Jülicher</hi>, <ref target='Pg255'>255</ref>, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Justin, Phil.</hi>, <ref target='Pg277'>277</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kahl, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg010'>10</ref>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kant, I.</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref>, <ref target='Pg037'>37</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg054'>54</ref>, <ref target='Pg063'>63</ref>, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>, <ref target='Pg077'>77</ref>, <ref target='Pg132'>132</ref>, <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref>, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>, <ref target='Pg263'>263</ref>, <ref target='Pg269'>269</ref>, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref>, <ref target='Pg293'>293</ref>, <ref target='Pg313'>313</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kaufmann, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>, <ref target='Pg153'>153</ref>, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref>, <ref target='Pg309'>309</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kelvin, Lord</hi> (see <ref target='Index-Thomson'><hi rend='italic'>Thomson</hi></ref>)</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kepler, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref>, <ref target='Pg184'>184</ref>, <ref target='Pg185'>185</ref>, <ref target='Pg187'>187</ref>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Kepler-Bund, <ref target='Pg333'>333</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kirchhoff, G. R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kleinpeter, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kneller</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg208'>208</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Knowledge and Faith, separation of, <ref target='Pg042'>42</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kochansky</hi>, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kohlbrugge, J. H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Köller</hi>, <ref target='Pg121'>121</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='415'/><anchor id='Pg415'/> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kollmann, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kone, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kromer, Bishop</hi>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Kues, N. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lacharpe</hi>, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lalande</hi>, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lamarck, J. B. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg157'>157</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lammenais, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lamont, J. von.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lange, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg237'>237</ref>, <ref target='Pg239'>239</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lapparent, A. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lateran Council, Fourth, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lavoisier, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Law, necessity of, <ref target='Pg408'>408</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Laws of nature, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lehmann, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lehmann, M.</hi>, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Leibnitz, G. W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg114'>114</ref>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref>, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref>, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Leo, the Great</hi>, <ref target='Pg383'>383</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Leo XIII.</hi>, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref>, <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lessing, G. F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg326'>326</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Leverrier, M.</hi>, <ref target='Pg048'>48</ref>, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg238'>238</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Liberalism, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref>, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref>, <ref target='Pg370'>370</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>License to teach, ecclesiastical, <ref target='Pg404'>404</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Liebig, J. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Liebmann, O.</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Life, first, whence did it come, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Linné, Karl</hi>, <ref target='Pg205'>205</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lipps, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg078'>78</ref>, <ref target='Pg135'>135</ref>, <ref target='Pg311'>311</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Locke, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Loisy, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Loosten, de</hi>, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lossen</hi>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lourdes, <ref target='Pg247'>247</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lüdeman</hi>, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Luther</hi>, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Lutheran Church, expelled Kepler, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Lyell, Ch.</hi>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Macaulay</hi>, <ref target='Pg407'>407</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mach, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Macolano</hi>, <ref target='Pg187'>187</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mädler, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mai, Cardinal</hi>, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Man, Descent of, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref></l> +<l>—— free, <ref target='Pg015'>15</ref>, <ref target='Pg025'>25</ref></l> +<l>—— his Destiny, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref>, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref></l> +<l>—— Member of Society, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Man, the autonomous, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref>, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref></l> +<l>—— the transcendental, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg037'>37</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Man's Emancipation, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref></l> +<l>—— Intellect, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Martius, von</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Masaryk, T. G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>, <ref target='Pg072'>72</ref>, <ref target='Pg136'>136</ref>, <ref target='Pg160'>160</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Maxwell, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg214'>214</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mayer, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg215'>215</ref>, <ref target='Pg239'>239</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Melanchthon</hi>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mendel, G. J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Menger, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Messer, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref>, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Method of modern Science, <ref target='Pg262'>262</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Michael, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref>, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref>, <ref target='Pg182'>182</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Migné</hi>, <ref target='Pg384'>384</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mill, Stuart</hi>, <ref target='Pg245'>245</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Miracles denied, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Modernism, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>, <ref target='Pg165'>165</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg389'>389</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Oath against, <ref target='Pg393'>393</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Moigno</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Moleschott, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref>, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mommsen, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg121'>121</ref>, <ref target='Pg128'>128</ref>, <ref target='Pg234'>234</ref>, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Monism, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref>, <ref target='Pg331'>331</ref></l> +<l>—— Definition of, <ref target='Pg244'>244</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Monists, <ref target='Pg331'>331</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Montanari, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Morality, <ref target='Pg325'>325</ref></l> +<l>—— independent of Religion, <ref target='Pg250'>250</ref>, <ref target='Pg336'>336</ref></l> +<l>—— no absolute Standard of, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Muckermann, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Müller, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg186'>186</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Müller, Fr.</hi>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Müller, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Münch, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg147'>147</ref>, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Muratori, L. A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg320'>320</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Mysticism</hi>, <ref target='Pg043'>43</ref>, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Nature, human, ignored, <ref target='Pg264'>264</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Newton</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref>, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref>, <ref target='Pg203'>203</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Nicolai, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg394'>394</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Niebergall, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Nietzsche</hi>, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref>, <ref target='Pg037'>37</ref>, <ref target='Pg053'>53</ref>, <ref target='Pg054'>54</ref>, <ref target='Pg079'>79</ref>, <ref target='Pg270'>270</ref>, <ref target='Pg273'>273</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Oath against Modernism, <ref target='Pg405'>405</ref></l> +<l>—— binding? <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='416'/><anchor id='Pg416'/> + +<lg> +<l>Oath of Allegiance in civil Professions, <ref target='Pg396'>396</ref></l> +<l>—— of the Professio Fidei Tridentina, <ref target='Pg394'>394</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Objectivism, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Oken</hi>, <ref target='Pg178'>178</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Olbers, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Omalius, J. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Oppression, of mental Liberty, by Party Rule, <ref target='Pg366'>366</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Oresme, Bishop</hi>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Osiander</hi>, <ref target='Pg184'>184</ref>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ostwald, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Owen, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ozanam, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Paganism, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref></l> +<l>—— extolled by modern Science, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref></l> +<l>—— preferred to Christianity, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Palacky</hi>, <ref target='Pg146'>146</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pantheism, <ref target='Pg023'>23</ref>, <ref target='Pg041'>41</ref>, <ref target='Pg284'>284</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Papacy, Importance of, <ref target='Pg373'>373</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Papal Charters of Universities, <ref target='Pg148'>148</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pascal</hi>, <ref target='Pg211'>211</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pasteur</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref>, <ref target='Pg222'>222</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref>, <ref target='Pg381'>381</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pastor, L. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Patients, made Subjects for medical Experiments, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Paul III.</hi>, <ref target='Pg184'>184</ref>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Paul IV.</hi>, <ref target='Pg170'>170</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Paulsen, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref>, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref>, <ref target='Pg039'>39</ref>, <ref target='Pg040'>40</ref>, <ref target='Pg041'>41</ref>, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>, <ref target='Pg049'>49</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg064'>64</ref>, <ref target='Pg078'>78</ref>, <ref target='Pg134'>134</ref>, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref>, <ref target='Pg239'>239</ref>, <ref target='Pg252'>252</ref>, <ref target='Pg253'>253</ref>, <ref target='Pg262'>262</ref>, <ref target='Pg274'>274</ref>, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref>, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg309'>309</ref>, <ref target='Pg312'>312</ref>, <ref target='Pg321'>321</ref>, <ref target='Pg335'>335</ref>, <ref target='Pg338'>338</ref>, <ref target='Pg382'>382</ref>, <ref target='Pg404'>404</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Paulus, H. E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg258'>258</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pedagogy, <ref target='Pg345'>345</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Perception, the Nature of human, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pesch, Chr.</hi>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Peschel, O.</hi>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pessimism</hi>, <ref target='Pg295'>295</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pfaff, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pfleiderer, O.</hi>, <ref target='Pg256'>256</ref>, <ref target='Pg259'>259</ref>, <ref target='Pg285'>285</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Philip, the Fair</hi>, <ref target='Pg152'>152</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Philosophical Errors, <ref target='Pg327'>327</ref></l> +<l>—— Training, great Want of, <ref target='Pg321'>321</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Philosophy, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg016'>16</ref>, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref>, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>, <ref target='Pg078'>78</ref>, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref>, <ref target='Pg275'>275</ref>, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Philosophy and the Faith, <ref target='Pg092'>92</ref></l> +<l>—— Scholastic, <ref target='Pg049'>49</ref>, <ref target='Pg053'>53</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Piazzi, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pindar</hi>, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pius IX.</hi>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref>, <ref target='Pg165'>165</ref>, <ref target='Pg166'>166</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pius X.</hi>, <ref target='Pg099'>99</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Plate, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg206'>206</ref>, <ref target='Pg237'>237</ref>, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref>, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg249'>249</ref>, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Plato</hi>, <ref target='Pg052'>52</ref>, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref>, <ref target='Pg249'>249</ref>, <ref target='Pg269'>269</ref>, <ref target='Pg275'>275</ref>, <ref target='Pg337'>337</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Plutarch</hi>, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Poggendorff</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pohle, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg209'>209</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Poincaré, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg114'>114</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Pope, his Person, <ref target='Pg098'>98</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Popes, and the Universities, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Prantl, K. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg324'>324</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Prayer, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pressensé, F. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg299'>299</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Primordial Genesis, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Progress, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Promoting the Christian Faith, the Aim of Founders of Universities, <ref target='Pg367'>367</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Protestantism, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref>, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg044'>44</ref>, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>, <ref target='Pg054'>54</ref>, <ref target='Pg066'>66</ref>, <ref target='Pg077'>77</ref>, <ref target='Pg097'>97</ref>, <ref target='Pg117'>117</ref>, <ref target='Pg128'>128</ref>, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref>, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref>, <ref target='Pg168'>168</ref>, <ref target='Pg193'>193</ref>, <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref>, <ref target='Pg202'>202</ref>, <ref target='Pg255'>255</ref>, <ref target='Pg293'>293</ref>, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref>, <ref target='Pg359'>359</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref>, <ref target='Pg390'>390</ref>, <ref target='Pg396'>396</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ptolemy</hi>, <ref target='Pg005'>5</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Pythagoras</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref>, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Quenstedt, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rade, M.</hi>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Radicalism, <ref target='Pg332'>332</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ramsay, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ranke, L. von.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ratzel, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Reason, its Limitations, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Reformation, the, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Reimarus, H. S.</hi>, <ref target='Pg258'>258</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Reinhold, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg391'>391</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Reinke, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Relative Truth, <ref target='Pg157'>157</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Religion, <ref target='Pg016'>16</ref>, <ref target='Pg020'>20</ref>, <ref target='Pg025'>25</ref>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref></l> +<l>—— abandoned, <ref target='Pg289'>289</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— distinguished from Science, <ref target='Pg266'>266</ref></l> +<l>—— of natural Reason, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Religious Instruction of Children, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='417'/><anchor id='Pg417'/> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Remus, John</hi>, <ref target='Pg196'>196</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Renan, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg054'>54</ref>, <ref target='Pg248'>248</ref>, <ref target='Pg258'>258</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Research, and Faith, <ref target='Pg059'>59</ref></l> +<l>—— Definition of, <ref target='Pg009'>9</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Restraint, proper, of Science, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Revelation, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>, <ref target='Pg051'>51</ref>, <ref target='Pg072'>72</ref>, <ref target='Pg077'>77</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref>, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref>, <ref target='Pg297'>297</ref></l> +<l>—— Proof of, <ref target='Pg138'>138</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Revolution, French, <ref target='Pg029'>29</ref>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref></l> +<l>—— of 1848, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='Index-Rheticus'/> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rheticus</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>G. Joachim</hi>), <ref target='Pg195'>195</ref>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rhodius</hi>, <ref target='Pg140'>140</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Riccioli, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg190'>190</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Right of Christians, to be represented, <ref target='Pg367'>367</ref></l> +<l>—— to teach, natural, <ref target='Pg369'>369</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Rights of Teacher, not unrestricted, <ref target='Pg346'>346</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ritter, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Romanes, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg221'>221</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Roscellin</hi>, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rosenberger</hi>, <ref target='Pg118'>118</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rosmini-Serbati</hi>, <ref target='Pg110'>110</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rothenbücher</hi>, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rousseau, J. J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Rudder, P. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg249'>249</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ruville, A. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg077'>77</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sabatier, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>, <ref target='Pg039'>39</ref>, <ref target='Pg078'>78</ref>, <ref target='Pg262'>262</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Saint-Hilaire</hi>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Saitschick</hi>, <ref target='Pg392'>392</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sarcey</hi>, <ref target='Pg173'>173</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Savigny, F. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg355'>355</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scepticism, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>, <ref target='Pg047'>47</ref>, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref>, <ref target='Pg293'>293</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schafhäutl, K. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Scheiner, Ch.</hi>, <ref target='Pg125'>125</ref>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schell, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg136'>136</ref>, <ref target='Pg172'>172</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schelling</hi>, <ref target='Pg004'>4</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Scherr, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg038'>38</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schiaparelli, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schiller</hi>, <ref target='Pg274'>274</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schleiermacher</hi>, <ref target='Pg045'>45</ref>, <ref target='Pg054'>54</ref>, <ref target='Pg290'>290</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schmiedel, P.</hi>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schneider, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schönbein</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg218'>218</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schönberg, Cardinal</hi>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Schools, free, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schopenhauer</hi>, <ref target='Pg035'>35</ref>, <ref target='Pg272'>272</ref>, <ref target='Pg274'>274</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schwann, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schwegler, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Schweitzer, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Science, an Activity of the human Mind, <ref target='Pg006'>6</ref></l> +<l>—— anti-Christian, its Danger, <ref target='Pg329'>329</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Definition, <ref target='Pg003'>3</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— Errors of, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— grave Charges against Modern, <ref target='Pg329'>329</ref></l> +<l>—— Limitations, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref></l> +<l>—— Power of, <ref target='Pg322'>322</ref></l> +<l>—— restricted by accidental Conditions, <ref target='Pg361'>361</ref></l> +<l>—— subject to God, <ref target='Pg006'>6</ref></l> +<l>—— subject to Imperfections of human Mind, <ref target='Pg006'>6</ref>, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref></l> +<l>—— subject to Truth, <ref target='Pg006'>6</ref></l> +<l>—— Vocation of, <ref target='Pg279'>279</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sciences, profane and the Faith, <ref target='Pg088'>88</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scientific Research, Methods, <ref target='Pg158'>158</ref></l> +<l>—— Teaching, Definition, <ref target='Pg316'>316</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scientists, Catholic, <ref target='Pg384'>384</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Scripture, does not teach profane Sciences, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref></l> +<l>—— Interpretation, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref></l> +<l>—— Narratives not to be taken in literal Sense, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Secchi, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg191'>191</ref>, <ref target='Pg208'>208</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sedgwick, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg219'>219</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Seminaries, <ref target='Pg400'>400</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sensuality, Emancipation of, Danger to Civilization, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sexual Perversities, <ref target='Pg347'>347</ref></l> +<l>—— Practice, natural, <ref target='Pg346'>346</ref></l> +<l>—— Questions, <ref target='Pg325'>325</ref></l> +<l>—— Reform, <ref target='Pg347'>347</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sham-Science, <ref target='Pg313'>313</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Silence not Denial, <ref target='Pg011'>11</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Smet, de</hi>, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Smith, Adam</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Smolko, S. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg359'>359</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Socialism, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref>, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref>, <ref target='Pg350'>350</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Socialists, <ref target='Pg331'>331</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Social question, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Sociology, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Socrates</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Soul, the, <ref target='Pg046'>46</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— the, an illusion, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Spencer, H.</hi>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>, <ref target='Pg313'>313</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Spicker, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>, <ref target='Pg026'>26</ref>, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref>, <ref target='Pg324'>324</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Spinoza, B.</hi>, <ref target='Pg041'>41</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Stägemann</hi>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='418'/><anchor id='Pg418'/> + +<lg> +<l>State, the, and Freedom of Teaching, <ref target='Pg340'>340</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Steudel</hi>, <ref target='Pg236'>236</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Strauss, D. F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg054'>54</ref>, <ref target='Pg065'>65</ref>, <ref target='Pg240'>240</ref>, <ref target='Pg258'>258</ref>, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref>, <ref target='Pg273'>273</ref>, <ref target='Pg280'>280</ref>, <ref target='Pg283'>283</ref>, <ref target='Pg286'>286</ref>, <ref target='Pg287'>287</ref>, <ref target='Pg315'>315</ref>, <ref target='Pg364'>364</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Stütz</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Subjectivism</hi>, <ref target='Pg033'>33</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Supernatural, Factors to be excluded, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— the, inadmissible, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Supervision of Teaching, Ecclesiastical, <ref target='Pg389'>389</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Sybel, L. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg292'>292</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Syllabus, the, <ref target='Pg055'>55</ref>, <ref target='Pg094'>94</ref>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg162'>162</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Tanner, A., <ref target='Pg192'>192</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Targioni-Tozzetti</hi>, <ref target='Pg194'>194</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Teachers, anti-Christian, <ref target='Pg358'>358</ref></l> +<l>—— Catholic, small Number of, <ref target='Pg365'>365</ref></l> +<l>—— Jewish, <ref target='Pg365'>365</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Teaching, Definition of, <ref target='Pg010'>10</ref></l> +<l>—— of the Church, as distinguished from Opinions of Theologians, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Tews, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg358'>358</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Thénard, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Theocentric View of the World, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Theologians, Catholic, of Repute, <ref target='Pg384'>384</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Theological Literature, Catholic, <ref target='Pg384'>384</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Theology and Progress, <ref target='Pg381'>381</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— a Science, <ref target='Pg378'>378</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— History of, <ref target='Pg403'>403</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Theophobia of Science, <ref target='Pg234'>234</ref>, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Theory of Rights, individualistic, <ref target='Pg313'>313</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Thomas, St.</hi>, <ref target='Pg082'>82</ref>, <ref target='Pg084'>84</ref>, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref>, <ref target='Pg262'>262</ref>, <ref target='Pg353'>353</ref>, <ref target='Pg388'>388</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Thomasius, Chr.</hi>, <ref target='Pg344'>344</ref>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<anchor id='Index-Thomson'/> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Thomson</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>Lord Kelvin</hi>), <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref>, <ref target='Pg238'>238</ref>, <ref target='Pg249'>249</ref>, <ref target='Pg251'>251</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg381'>381</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Toland, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Treitschke, H. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg129'>129</ref>, <ref target='Pg179'>179</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Tröltsch, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg134'>134</ref>, <ref target='Pg167'>167</ref>, <ref target='Pg298'>298</ref>, <ref target='Pg356'>356</ref>, <ref target='Pg389'>389</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Truth, relative, <ref target='Pg049'>49</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Tyndall, J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg217'>217</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Überweg, F.</hi>, <ref target='Pg267'>267</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Uhlich, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg291'>291</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>United States, <ref target='Pg111'>111</ref>, <ref target='Pg368'>368</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Universities, <ref target='Pg150'>150</ref>, <ref target='Pg341'>341</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +<l>—— and the Church, <ref target='Pg371'>371</ref></l> +<l>—— Catholic, <ref target='Pg370'>370</ref></l> +<l>—— free, <ref target='Pg368'>368</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>University, and Theology, <ref target='Pg398'>398</ref></l> +<l>—— Teachers, <ref target='Pg017'>17</ref></l> +<l>—— vanishing Respect for, <ref target='Pg334'>334</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Unprepossession in Research, <ref target='Pg121'>121</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg357'>357</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Urban IV.</hi>, <ref target='Pg155'>155</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Urban V.</hi>, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Urban VIII.</hi>, <ref target='Pg096'>96</ref>, <ref target='Pg186'>186</ref>, <ref target='Pg189'>189</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vaillant</hi>, <hi rend='italic'>Anarchist</hi>, <ref target='Pg350'>350</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Valerius, Maximus</hi>, <ref target='Pg319'>319</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Varnhagen</hi>, <ref target='Pg036'>36</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vatican Archives, <ref target='Pg095'>95</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Vatican Council, <ref target='Pg068'>68</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg090'>90</ref>, <ref target='Pg103'>103</ref>, <ref target='Pg106'>106</ref>, <ref target='Pg109'>109</ref>, <ref target='Pg130'>130</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vaudin</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vierort, K. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>View of life, Christian, <ref target='Pg252'>252</ref></l> +<l>—— of the World, anthropocentric, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref></l> +<l>—— —— Christian, <ref target='Pg014'>14</ref>, <ref target='Pg027'>27</ref></l> +<l>—— —— humanitarian, <ref target='Pg018'>18</ref>, <ref target='Pg021'>21</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg031'>31</ref></l> +<l>—— —— theocentric, <ref target='Pg019'>19</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l>Views of the World, various, <ref target='Pg013'>13</ref>, <ref target='Pg022'>22</ref>, <ref target='Pg159'>159</ref>, <ref target='Pg294'>294</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vigilius, St.</hi>, <ref target='Pg180'>180</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vincent, St. of Lerin</hi>, <ref target='Pg383'>383</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Virchow, R. von</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref>, <ref target='Pg241'>241</ref>, <ref target='Pg323'>323</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vogt, K.</hi>, <ref target='Pg030'>30</ref>, <ref target='Pg115'>115</ref>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Volkmann, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Volta, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg212'>212</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi>, <ref target='Pg224'>224</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Voltaire</hi>, <ref target='Pg028'>28</ref>, <ref target='Pg326'>326</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Vries, H. de</hi>, <ref target='Pg220'>220</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Waagen, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wahrmund, L.</hi>, <ref target='Pg086'>86</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wallace, A.</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Walsh, J. J.</hi>, <ref target='Pg208'>208</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Walther, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg284'>284</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Washington, George</hi>, <ref target='Pg349'>349</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wasmann, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref>, <ref target='Pg223'>223</ref>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>, <ref target='Pg249'>249</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wehner, von</hi>, <ref target='Pg405'>405</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Weismann</hi>, <ref target='Pg242'>242</ref></l> +</lg> + +<pb n='419'/><anchor id='Pg419'/> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Weizsäcker</hi>, <ref target='Pg257'>257</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Westermark</hi>, <ref target='Pg050'>50</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Westhoff</hi>, <ref target='Pg177'>177</ref>, <ref target='Pg074'>74</ref>, <ref target='Pg145'>145</ref>, <ref target='Pg276'>276</ref>, <ref target='Pg282'>282</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wimpheling</hi>, <ref target='Pg156'>156</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wobbermin, G.</hi>, <ref target='Pg245'>245</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wolf, R.</hi>, <ref target='Pg207'>207</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wöllner, Minister</hi>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Wundt, W.</hi>, <ref target='Pg024'>24</ref>, <ref target='Pg052'>52</ref>, <ref target='Pg062'>62</ref>, <ref target='Pg071'>71</ref>, <ref target='Pg137'>137</ref>, <ref target='Pg235'>235</ref>, <ref target='Pg243'>243</ref>, <ref target='Pg254'>254</ref>, <ref target='Pg288'>288</ref>, <ref target='Pg290'>290</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Young, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg119'>119</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zacharias, Pope</hi>, <ref target='Pg180'>180</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zedlitz, von</hi>, <ref target='Pg363'>363</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zeller, E.</hi>, <ref target='Pg246'>246</ref>, <ref target='Pg255'>255</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Ziegler, Th.</hi>, <ref target='Pg059'>59</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zittel</hi>, <ref target='Pg116'>116</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zöckler</hi>, <ref target='Pg007'>7</ref>, <ref target='Pg181'>181</ref>, <ref target='Pg201'>201</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zoen, Bishop</hi>, <ref target='Pg151'>151</ref></l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l><hi rend='italic'>Zola</hi>, <ref target='Pg248'>248</ref> <hi rend='italic'>et seq.</hi></l> +</lg> + +</div> + +</body> +<back rend="page-break-before: right"> + <div id="footnotes"> + <index index="toc" /> + <index index="pdf" /> + <head>Footnotes</head> + <divGen type="footnotes"/> + </div> + <div rend="page-break-before: right"> + <divGen type="pgfooter" /> + </div> +</back> +</text> +</TEI.2> |