THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION.

By its interference, religion can inspire science, and again science by

its interference can purify religion. The most beautiful spectacle in

human society is a priest contributing to science and a scientist

contributing to religion. The one-sided man is always an imperfect man;

and an imperfect man as a teacher of perfection is a dangerous teacher

for young generations.

Two Slavs, Nicolaus Copernicus, from Thorn, and Ruggiero Boscovich, from

Ragusa, both Roman Catholic priests, were at the same time both ardent

scientists. Copernicus postulated the heliocentric planetary system instead

of the geocentric. This happened soon after Columbus made a great

revolution in geographical science by discovering America. Some people

thought the end of the Church had come after Copernicus' discovery that the

sun and not the earth is the centre of the world. But Copernicus not only

did not think so, but continued quietly in his vocation as a priest and

dedicated his famous work to Pope Paul III.

Ruggiero Boscovich was not such a great discoverer as Copernicus; still he

was one of the most distinguished scientific and philosophic minds in the

eighteenth century. In his "Theoria philosophiæ naturalis," he tried to

prove that bodies are composed not of a continuous material substance but

rather of innumerable point-like structures or particles which are without

any extension or divisibility. These elements are endowed with a repulsive

force which can, under special circumstances (of distance), become

attractive. Boscovich's philosophical system can be called a dynamistic

_atomismus_.

Men with much smaller scientific successes sometimes consider it their duty

to separate themselves from the Christian Church. But great men like

Copernicus and Boscovich possessed in a high degree the _noble catholicity_

which should always exist between religion and science. For every great

revolution in science meant also a great revolution in religion. A

scientific revolution could never shake the realities of religion, but only

the illusions of religion.

This was likewise the great result of the religious revolutions among the

Slavs: not to shake the realities but the illusions of religion. Pride,

superstitions and hatred have produced all the revolutions in the Church,

the revolutions which meant for the Church real ventilation or punishment.

These revolutions gave light and air to the Roman Church. Either the

official books admit it, or they do not. No matter; the living Church

admits it. She has built monuments to the prophets whom she killed or

persecuted. No one is without a glorious monument--neither Huss nor

Savonarola, neither Bruno nor Hieronymus of Prague, neither Trubar nor

Strossmayer. The living Church always admired men of suffering and not men

of pleasure. It was not the self-sufficient prelates who promoted the

Christian cause, with their books and notes and discussions, but the

sufferers, hungry and thirsty for the Kingdom of God. Christ was victorious

over Nero in the Coliseum, but oftentimes afterwards Nero was victorious

over Christ in the Church. But Nero must go, and Christ come. We have all

pledged our word in our childhood to act so that Nero's spirit may decrease

and Christ's spirit increase in the world. We cannot otherwise keep our

pledge unless we adhere to the _noble catholicity_ of the Christian Church,

which is the very kernel of vulgar and verbal catholicity. But we cannot

grasp all the Christian centuries and generations behind us and bind our

own life with what is _noble_ and _catholic_ in all of them unless we are

men of suffering, intuition and action. And we can be all three.

The Religious Spirit of the Slavs Three Lectures Given in Lent, 1916 · 第 19 / 22 题