LECTURE BY PROFESSOR WHITE, BEFORE THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE.
This lecture did not disappoint the expectations of those familiar with the subject of the discourse, which, considering the difficulty of restating familiar historical facts in such a manner as to clothe them in a garb of originality, is high praise. Many, however, found great difficulty in hearing the speaker at the back part of the hall, and some left the room on that account. This was unfortunate, as the lecture will scarcely be exceeded in interest by any subsequent one of the course. The speaker said that "In all modern history, interference with science in the supposed interest of religion--no matter how conscientious such interference may have been--has resulted in the direst evils both to religion and science, and invariably. And on the other hand all untrammeled scientific investigation, no matter how dangerous to religion some of its stages may have seemed, temporarily, to be, has invariably resulted in the highest good of religion and science. I say invariably--I mean exactly that. It is a rule to which history shows not one exception. It would seem, logically, that this statement could not be gainsaid. God's truth must agree, whether discovered by looking within upon the soul or without upon the world. A truth written upon the human heart to-day in its full play of emotions or passions, cannot be at any real variance even with a truth written upon a fossil whose poor life was gone millions of years ago. And this being so, it would also seem a truth irrefragable; that the search for each of these kind of truths must be followed out in its own lines, by its own methods, to its own results, without any interference from investigators along other lines by other methods. And it would also seem logically that we might work on in absolute confidence that whatever, at any moment, might seem to be the relative positions of the two different bands of workers, they must at last come together, for truth is one. But logic is not history. History is full of interferences which have cost the earth dear. Strangest of all, some of the most direful of them have been made by the best of men, actuated by the purest motives, seeking the noblest results. These interferences and the struggle against them make up the warfare of science. One statement more to clear the ground. You will not understand me at all to say that religion has done nothing for science. It has done much for it. The work of Christianity has been mighty indeed. Through these 2,000 years it has undermined servitude, mitigated tyranny, given hope to the hopeless, comfort to the afflicted, light to the blind, bread to the starving, life to the dying, and all this work continues. And its work for science, too, has been great. It has fostered science often and developed it. It has given great minds to it, and but for the fears of the timid its record in this respect would have been as great as in the other. Unfortunately, religious men started centuries ago with the idea that purely scientific investigation is unsafe--that theology must intervene. So began this great modern war."
Professor White next reviewed the battle between science and theology on the subjects of the "earth's shape, surface, and relations," "the position of the earth among the heavenly bodies," in which Copernicus and Galileo struggled so bravely and successfully for truth.
The lecturer said:
"The principal weapons in the combat are worth examining. They are very easily examined; you may pick them up on any of the battle-fields of science; but on that field they were used with more effect than on almost any other. These weapons were two epithets--the epithets 'Infidel' and 'Atheist.' These can hardly be classed with civilized weapons; they are burning arrows; they set fire to great masses of popular prejudices. Smoke rises to obscure the real questions. Fire bursts out at times to destroy the attacked party. They are poisoned weapons. They go to the heart of loving women; they alienate dear children; they injure the man after life is ended, for they leave poisoned wounds in the hearts of those who loved him best--fears for his eternal happiness, dread of the Divine displeasure. The battle-fields of science are thickly strewn with these. They have been used against almost every man who has ever done anything for his fellow-men. The list of those who have been denounced as Infidel and Atheist includes almost all great men of science--general scholars, inventors, philanthropists. The deepest Christian life, the most noble Christian character has not availed to shield combatants. Christians like Isaac Newton and Pascal, and John Locke and John Howard, have had these weapons hurled against them. Nay, in these very times we have seen a noted champion hurl these weapons against John Milton, and with it another missile which often appears on these battle-fields--the epithets of 'blasphemer' and 'hater of the Lord.' Of course, in these days these weapons though often effective in disturbing the ease of good men and though often powerful in scaring women, are somewhat blunted. Indeed, they do not infrequently injure assailants more than assailed. So it was not in the days of Galileo. These weapons were then in all their sharpness and venom. The first champion who appears against him is Bellarmine, one of the greatest of theologians and one of the poorest of scientists. He was earnest, sincere, learned, but made the fearful mistake for the world of applying direct literal interpretation of Scripture to science. The consequences were sad, indeed. Could he with his vast powers have taken a different course, humanity would have been spared the long and fearful war which ensued, and religion would have saved to herself thousands on thousands of the best and brightest men in after ages. The weapons, which men of Bellarmine's stamp used, were theological. They held up before the world the dreadful consequences which must result to Christian theology were the doctrine to prevail that the heavenly bodies revolve about the sun, and not about the earth.
"The next great series of battles were fought on those great fields occupied by such sciences as Chemistry and Natural Philosophy. Even before these sciences were out of their childhood--while yet they were tottering mainly towards, childish objects and by childish steps--the champions of that same old mistaken conception of rigid Scriptural interpretation began the war. The catalogue of chemists and physicists persecuted or thwarted would fill volumes."
After alluding to many other battle-fields of science which might not for want of time be dwelt upon at length the lecturer reviewed the battle grounds of medicine and anatomy on which some of the severest warfare has been waged.
The speaker here remarked that "perhaps the most unfortunate thing that has ever been done for Christianity is the tying it to forms of science and systems of education, which are doomed and gradually sinking. Just as in the time of Roger Bacon excellent but mistaken men devoted all their energies to binding Christianity to Aristotle. Just as in the time of Reuchlin and Erasmus they insisted on binding Christianity to Thomas Aquinas, so in the time of Vesalius such men gave all efforts to linking Christianity to Galen. The cry has been the same in all ages. It is the same which we hear in this age against scientific studies--the cry for what is called 'sound learning.' Whether standing for Aristotle against Bacon, or Aquinas against Erasmus, or Galen against Vesalius, or making mechanical Greek verses at Eton, instead of studying the handiwork of the Almighty, or reading Euripides with translations instead of Leasing and Goethe in the original, the cry always is for 'sound learning.' The idea always is that these studies are safe."
The speaker next proceeded to show that not alone in Catholic countries, has such warfare been waged, and that even now in Protestant America the fight is going on.
One of the fields on which the severest warfare had raged in Protestant countries was that of Geology. "From the first lispings of investigators in this science there was war. The early sound doctrine was that fossil remains were lusus naturae--freaks of nature--and in 1517 Fracastor was violently attacked because he thought them something more. No less a man than Bernard Palissy followed up the contest, on the right side, in France, but it required 150 years to carry the day fairly against this single preposterous theory. The champion who dealt it the deadly blow was Scilla, and his weapons were facts obtained by examination of the fossils of Calabria, (1670). But the advocates of tampering with scientific reasoning soon retired to a now position. It was strong, for it was apparently based upon Scripture--though, as the whole world now knows, an utterly exploded interpretation of Scripture. The new position was that the fossils were produced by the deluge of Noah. In vain had it been shown by such devoted Christians as Bernard Palissy that this theory was utterly untenable; in vain did good men protest against the injury sure to result to religion by tying it to a scientific theory sure to be exploded--the doctrine that the fossils were remains of animals drowned at the flood continued to be upheld by the great majority as 'sound' doctrine. It took 120 year for the searchers of God's truth, as revealed in nature--such men as Buffon, Linnaeus, Woodward, and Whitehurst--to run under these mighty fabrics of error, and by statements which could not be resisted, to explode them.
"Strange as it may at first seem, the war on geology was waged more fiercely in Protestant countries than Catholic, and of all countries England furnished the most bitter opponents. You have noted already that there are generally two sorts of attacks on a new science. First, there is the attack by pitting against science some great doctrine in theology. You saw this in astronomy, when Bellarmine and others insisted that the doctrine of the earth's revolving about the sun is contrary to the doctrine of the Incarnation. So now against geology it was urged that the scientific doctrine that the fossils represented animals which died before Adam was contrary to the doctrine of Adam's fall, and that death entered the world by sin. Then there is the attack by the literal interpretation of texts, which serves a better purpose generally in arousing prejudice. It is difficult to realize it now, but within the memory of the majority of those before me, the battle was raging most fiercely in England, and both these kinds of artillery were in full play and filling the civilized world with their roar. Less than thirty years ago, the Rev. J. Mellor Brown was hurling at all geologists alike, and especially at such Christian divines as Dr. Burkland, Dean Conybeare, and Pye Smith, and such religious scholars as Professor Sedgwick, the epithets of 'Infidel,' 'Impugner of the Sacred Record,' and 'Assailant of the Volume of God.' His favorite weapon was the charge that these men were 'attacking the Truth of God,' forgetting that they were simply opposing the mistaken interpretations of J. Mellor Brown. He declared geology 'not a subject of lawful inquiry;' he speaks of it as 'a dark art,' as 'dangerous and disreputable,' as a 'forbidden province.' This attempt to scare men from science having failed, various other means were taken.
"To say nothing about England, it is humiliating to human nature to remember the trials to which the pettiest and narrowest of men subjected such Christian scholars in our country as Benjamin Silliman and Edward Hitchcock. But it is a duty and a pleasure to state here that one great Christian scholar did honor to religion and to himself by standing up for the claims of science despite all these clamors. That man was Nicholas Wiseman, better known afterward as Cardinal Wiseman. The conduct of this pillar of the Roman Catholic Church contrasts nobly with that of timid Protestants who were filling England with shrieks and denunciations. Perhaps the most singular attempt against geology was that made by a fine specimen of the English Don, Dean Cockburn of York, to abuse its champions out of the field. Without apparently the simplest elementary knowledge of geology, he opened a battery of abuse. He gives it to the world at large by pulpit and press; he even inflicts it upon leading statesmen by private letters. But these weapons did not succeed. They were like Chinese gongs and dragon lanterns against rifled cannon. Buckland, Pye Smith, Lyell, Silliman, Hitchcock, Murchison, Agassiz, Dana, and a host of of noble champions besides, pressed on the battle for truth was won. And was it won merely for men of science? The whole civilized world declares that it was won for religion; that thereby has infinitely increased the knowledge of the power and goodness of God."
The lecturer classed the present opposition of the Catholics to the Free School system in this country among the long list of battles between science and theology and concluded his lecture as follows:
"But, my friends, I will not weary you with so recent a chapter in the history of the great warfare extending through the centuries. There are cheering omens. The greatest and best men in the churches--the men standing at centers of thought--are insisting with power, more and more, that religion shall no longer be tied to so injurious a policy--that searchers for truth, whether in Theology or Natural Science, shall work on as friends, sure that, no matter how much at variance they may at times seem to be, the truths they reach shall finally be fused into each other. No one need fear the result. No matter whether science shall complete her demonstration that man has been on the earth six thousand years or six hundred thousand. No matter whether she reveal new ideas of the Creator or startling relations between his creatures--the result, when fully thought out, will serve and strengthen religion not less than science. The very finger of the Almighty has written on history that science must be studied by means proper to itself, and in no other way. That history is before us all. No one can gainsay it. It is decisive, for it is this: There has never been a scientific theory framed for the use of Scriptural texts, which has been made to stand. This fact alone shows that our wonderful volume of sacred literature was not given for any such purpose as that to which so many earnest men have endeavored to wrest it. The power of that volume has been mighty indeed. It has inspired the best deeds our world has known. Despite the crusts which men have formed about it--despite the fetters which they have placed upon it--Christianity has blessed age after age of the past, and will go on as a blessing through age after age of the future. Let the Warfare of Science, then, be changed. Let it be a warfare in which religion and science shall stand together as allies, not against each other as enemies. Let the fight be for truth of every kind against falsehood of every kind--for justice against injustice--for right against wrong--for beauty against deformity--for goodness against vice--and the great warfare which has brought so many sufferings, shall bring to the earth God's richest blessings."