of the righteous will be material; that it will, in fact, be the present
earth, purified by the fires of the last day, and rising from the final
ruin in renovated splendor. We have shown that this is the doctrine of
Scripture, of philosophy, and of a majority of the Christian church. A
solid world, then, will exist, whose geology can be studied by glorified
minds far more accurately and successfully than the globe which we
inhabit; for those minds will doubtless be able to penetrate the entire
mass of the globe, and learn its whole structure. The final conflagration
may, indeed, for the most part, obliterate the traces of present and past
organic beings. But according to the doctrine of action and reaction in
mechanics, in chemistry, in electricity, and in organization, every change
that has ever passed over the earth has left traces of its occurrence
which can never be blotted out; and it is not improbable that glorified
minds will possess the power of discovering and reading these records of
the past, if not on the principle just specified, yet in some other way;
so that the entire geological history of our planet will probably pass in
clear light before them. Points which we see only through a glass darkly
will then stand forth in full daylight; and from the glimpses we are able
to obtain in this world of its present geological changes, what a mighty
and interesting series will be seen by celestial minds! If, even by the
colored rays which come upon us through the twilight of this world, we
are able to see so many striking illustrations of the divine character
engraven on the solid rocks, what a noble volume of religious truth shall
be found written there, when the light of heaven shall penetrate the
earth's deep foundations! Those foundations, figuratively described in
revelation as so many precious stones, bearing up a city of pure gold,
clear as glass, will then reflect a richer light than the costliest
literal gems which the rocks now yield. The geology of heaven will be
resplendent with divine glory.
We see, then, with a few probable exceptions, resulting from a difference
between the organism of heaven and earth, that science will survive the
ruin of this world, and in a nobler form engage the minds, and interest
the hearts, of heaven's inhabitants. It will, indeed, form a vast
storehouse, whence pious minds can draw fuel to kindle into a purer and
brighter flame their love and their devotion; for thence will they derive
new and higher developments of the divine character. Shall we not, then,
admit that to be religious truth on earth which in heaven will form the
food of perfectly holy minds?
The position which I laid down, at the outset, that scientific truth,
rightly applied, is religious truth, seems to me most clearly established.
If admitted, there flow from it several inferences of no small interest,
which I am constrained to present to your consideration.
_In the first place, I infer from this discussion that the principles of
science are a transcript of the Divine Character._
I mean by this, that the laws of nature, which are synonymous with the
principles of science, are not the result of any arbitrary and special
enactment on the part of the Deity, but flow naturally from his
perfections; so that, in fact, the varied principles of science are but so
many expressions of the perfections of Jehovah. If the universe had only a
transient existence, we might suppose the laws that govern it to be the
result of a special ordination of the Deity, and destined to perish with
the annihilation of matter. But since we have no evidence that matter will
ever perish, and at least probable evidence that it will exist forever,
the more rational supposition is, that its laws result from the nature of
things, and are only a development of so many features of the divine
character. If so, then the most important inquiry in the study of the
sciences is to learn from them the phases in which they present the divine
perfections.
_In the second place, it does not follow from this subject that the most
extensive acquisitions in science necessarily imply the possession of true
piety._
Piety consists in the exercise of right affections of heart towards God,
excited by religious truth. Now, I have attempted to show only, that the
natural tendency of scientific truth is to excite such religious
affections; but that tendency, like all other good influences, may be, and
often is, resisted. Hence a man may reach the loftiest pinnacle of
scientific glory whose heart has never heaved with one religious emotion.
He may penetrate to the very holy of holies in nature's temple, and yet
retain his atheism, in spite of the hallowed influences that surround him.
Nothing is plainer in theory, and, alas! nothing has been more surely
confirmed by experience, than that the possession of science is not the
possession of religion.
_In the third place, what a perversion of science it is to employ it
against religion!_
Rightly understood, and fairly interpreted, there is not a single
scientific truth that does not harmoniously accord with revealed as well
as natural religion; and yet, by superficial minds, almost every one of
these principles has, at one time or another, been regarded as in
collision with religion, and especially with revelation. One after another
have these apparent discrepancies melted away before the clearer light of
further examination. And yet, up to the present day, not a few, closing
their eyes against the lessons of experience, still fancy that the
responses of science are not in unison with those from revelation. But
this is a sentiment which finds no place with the profound and
unprejudiced philosopher; for he has seen too much of the harmony between
the works and the word of God to doubt the identity of their origin. He
knows it to be a sad perversion of scientific truth to use it for the
discredit of religion. He knows that the inspiration of the Almighty
breathed the same spirit into science as into religion; and if they utter
discordant tones, it must be because one or the other has been forced to
speak in an unnatural dialect.
_In the fourth place, how entirely have the natural tendencies of science
been misunderstood, when they have been represented as leading to
religious scepticism!_
I do not deny the fact that many scientific men have been sceptical. But I
maintain that this has been in spite of science, rather than the result of
its natural tendency; for we have shown that tendency in all cases to be
favorable to piety. Other more powerful causes, therefore, must have
operated to counteract the natural influence of scientific truth in those
cases where men eminent for science have spurned away from them the
authority of religion. Among these causes, the pride of knowledge is one
of the most powerful; and before the mind has attained to very profound
views of science, this pride does often exert a most disastrous influence
upon a man's religious feelings.
He is looked up to as an oracle on other subjects, and why should he not
be equally wise concerning religion? It is natural for him to feel
desirous, in such circumstances, of rising above all vulgar and
superstitious views, and of convincing his fellow-men that he has made as
great discoveries in religion as in science. He, therefore, calls in
question the prevailing religious opinions. Having once taken his stand
against the truth, pride does not allow him to recede, and he endeavors to
convert scientific truth into weapons against religion. And this
perversion produces the impression, with those not familiar with its
natural tendency, that science fosters scepticism.
Another cause of this scepticism is a superficial acquaintance with the
religious bearings of scientific truth. It is one thing to master the
principles of science in an abstract form, and quite a different thing to
understand their religious bearings. Moral reasoning is so different from
physical and mathematical, that often a mind which is a prodigy for the
latter, is a mere Lilliput in the former. And yet that mind may fancy
itself as profound in the one as in the other, and may, therefore, be as
tenacious of its errors in religion as of its demonstrated verities in
science.
In the following extract it will be seen that Dr. Chalmers imputes the
religious scepticism connected with science chiefly to a superficial
acquaintance with science. His remarks may seem unreasonably severe and
sweeping; nevertheless, they deserve consideration. And they accord with
the idea of Lord Bacon, who says, "A smattering of philosophy leads to
atheism; whereas a thorough acquaintance with it brings him back again to
religion." "We have heard," Dr. Chalmers remarks, "that the study of
natural science disposes to infidelity. But we feel persuaded that this is
a danger associated only with a slight and partial, never with a deep,
and adequate, and comprehensive, view of its principles. It is very
possible that the conjunction between science and scepticism may at
present be more frequently realized than in former days; but this is only
because, in spite of all that is alleged about this our more enlightened
day and more enlightened public, our science is neither so deeply founded,
nor of such firm and thorough staple, as it was wont to be. We have lost
in depth what we have gained in diffusion; having neither the massive
erudition, nor the gigantic scholarship, nor the profound and well-laid
philosophy of a period that has now gone by; and it is to this that
Infidelity stands indebted for her triumphs among the scoffers and
superficialists of a half-learned generation."--_Chalmers's Works_, vol.
vii. p. 262.
Briefly, but nobly, has Sir John Herschel vindicated science from the
charge of sceptical tendencies. "Nothing can be more unfounded than the
objection which has been taken _in limine_ by persons, well meaning,
perhaps, certainly of narrow minds, against the study of natural
philosophy, and, indeed, against all science, that it fosters in its
cultivators an undue and overweening self-conceit, leads them to doubt the
immortality of the soul, and to scoff at revealed religion. Its natural
effect, we may confidently assert, on every well-constituted mind, is and
must be the direct contrary. No doubt the testimony of natural reason, on
whatever exercised, must, of course, stop short of those truths which it
is the object of revelation to make known; but while it places the
existence and principal attributes of a Deity on such grounds as to render
doubt absurd, and atheism ridiculous, it unquestionably opposes no natural
or necessary obstacle to further progress; on the contrary, by cherishing
as a vital principle an unbounded spirit of inquiry and ardency of
expectation, it unfetters the mind from prejudices of every kind, and
leaves it open to every impression of a higher nature, which it is
susceptible of receiving; guarding only against enthusiasm and
self-deception by a habit of strict investigation, but encouraging, rather
than suppressing, every thing that can offer a prospect or hope beyond the
present obscure and unsatisfactory state. The character of the true
philosopher is to hope all things not impossible, and to believe all
things not unreasonable."--_Diss. on Study of Nat. Phil._
In speaking of geology and revelation, Sir John says, "There cannot be two
truths in contradiction to one another, and a man must have a mind fitted
neither for scientific nor for religious truth, whose religion can be
disturbed by geology, or whose geology can be distorted from its character
of an inductive science by a determination to accommodate its results to
preconceived interpretations of the Mosaic cosmogony."--_Dr. J. P. Smith's
Lectures_, p. viii. 4th edition.
"We have often mourned," says M'Cosh, "over the attempts made to set the
works of God against the word of God, and thereby excite, propagate, and
perpetuate jealousies fitted to separate parties that ought to live in
closest union. In particular, we have always regretted that endeavors
should have been made to depreciate nature with a view of exalting
revelation; it has always appeared to us to be nothing else than the
degrading of one part of God's works in the hope thereby of exalting and
recommending another." "Perilous as it is at all times for the friends of
religion to set themselves against natural science, it is especially
dangerous in an age like the present.
"It is no profane work that is engaged in by those who, in all humility,
would endeavor to remove jealousies between parties whom God has joined
together, and whom man is not at liberty to put asunder. We are not
lowering the dignity of science when we command it to do what all the
objects which it looks at and admires do--when we command it to worship
God. Nor are we detracting from the honor which is due to religion when we
press it to take science into its service, and accept the homage which it
is able to pay. We are seeking to exalt both when we show how nature
conducts man to the threshold of religion, and when from this point we bid
him look abroad on the wide territories of nature. We would aid at the
same time both religion and science, by removing those prejudices against
sacred truth which nature has been employed to foster; and we would
accomplish this not by casting aside and discarding nature, but by rightly
interpreting it.
"Let not science and religion be reckoned as opposing citadels, frowning
defiance upon each other, and their troops brandishing their armor in
hostile attitude. They have too many common foes, if they would but think
of it, in ignorance and prejudice, in passion and vice, under all their
forms, to admit of their lawfully wasting their strength in a useless
warfare with each other. Science has a foundation, and so has religion;
let them unite their foundations, and the basis will be broader, and they
will be two compartments of one great fabric reared to the glory of God.
Let the one be the outer and the other the inner court. In the one, let
all look, and admire, and adore; and in the other, let those who have
faith kneel, and pray, and praise. Let the one be the sanctuary where
human learning may present its richest incense as an offering to God, and
the other the holiest of all, separated from it by a veil now rent in
twain, and in which, on a blood-sprinkled mercy-seat, we pour out the
love of a reconciled heart, and hear the oracles of the living
God."--_Method of the Divine Government_, p. 449, _et seq._
_In the fifth place, scientific men and religious men may learn from this
subject to regard each other as engaged in a common cause._
If it be indeed true that scientific truth, rightly applied, is religious
truth, then may the religious man be sure that every scientific discovery
will ultimately contribute to the illustration of the character or
government of the Deity; and therefore should he encourage and rejoice in
all such investigations, and bid God speed to the votaries of science.
Even though he cannot see how the new discovery will illustrate religion,
and though, when imperfectly developed, it may seem to have an unfavorable
aspect, he need not fear to confide in the general principle that science
and religion are alike of divine origin, and must be in harmony. On the
other hand, the votary of science should remember that the state of
society most favorable to his pursuits is one in which religion exerts the
strongest influence. It is for his interest, therefore, merely as a lover
of science, and much more as a moral and accountable agent, to have pure
religion prevail. Scientific and religious men should, therefore, look
upon each other as co-laborers in a most noble cause--in illustrating the
divine character and government. All jealousy and narrow-minded
exclusiveness should be banished, and side by side should they labor in
warm-hearted and generous sympathy. Alas! how different from this has been
the history of the past! and, to a great extent, how different it is at
present! "A study of the natural world," says Professor Sedgwick, "teaches
not the truths of revealed religion, nor do the truths of religion inform
us of the inductions of physical science. Hence it is that men, whose
studies are too much confined to one branch of knowledge, often learn to
overrate themselves, and so become narrow minded. Bigotry is a besetting
sin of our nature. Too often has it been the attendant of religious zeal;
but it is perhaps the most bitter and unsparing when found among the
irreligious. A philosopher, not understanding one atom of their spirit,
will sometimes scoff at the labors of religious men; and one who calls
himself religious will, perhaps, return a like harsh judgment, and thank
God that he is not as the philosophers; forgetting, all the while, that
man can ascend to no knowledge except by faculties given to him by his
Creator's hand, and that all natural knowledge is but a reflection of the
will of God. In harsh judgments, such as these, there is not only much
folly, but much sin. True wisdom consists in seeing how all the faculties
of the mind and all parts of knowledge bear upon each other, so as to work
together to a common end; ministering at once to the happiness of man and
his Maker's glory."--_Discourse on the Studies of the University_, 5th
edition, p. 105, appendix.
_In the sixth place, the subject shows us what is the most important use
to be derived from science._
It does not consist, as men have been supposing, in its application to the
useful arts, whereby civilization, and human comfort and happiness are so
greatly promoted; although men have thereby been raised from a state of
barbarism and advanced to a high point on the scale of refinement. It is
not the application of science as a means of enlarging and disciplining
the mind; although this would be a noble result of scientific study. But
it is its application for the illustration of religion. This, I say, is
its most important use. For what higher or nobler purpose can any pursuit
subserve than in developing the character, government, and will of that
infinite Being, who is the sum and centre of all perfection and happiness?
Other objects accomplished by science are important, and in the bustle of
life they may seem to be its chief end. But in the calmness of mature
years, when we begin to estimate things according to their real value, we
shall see that the religious bearings of any pursuit far transcend in
importance all its other relations; for all its other tendencies and uses
are limited to this world, and will, therefore, be transient; but every
thing which bears the stamp of religion is immortal, and every thing which
concerns the Deity is infinite. It is true that but few who are engaged in
scientific pursuits make much account of their bearings upon man's highest
interests; but very different will it be in heaven. There, so far as we
know, all the applications of science to the useful arts will be unknown,
and the great object of its cultivation will be to gain new and clearer
views of the perfections and plans of Jehovah, and thus to awaken towards
him a deeper reverence and a warmer love. And such should be the richest
fruit of scientific researches on earth.
_In the seventh place, the subject shows us that those who are the most
eminent in science ought to be the most eminent in piety._
I am far from maintaining that science is a sufficient guide in religion.
On the other hand, if left to itself, as I fully admit,--
"It leads to bewilder, and dazzles to blind."
Nor do I maintain that scientific truth, even when properly appreciated,
will compare at all, in its influence upon the human mind, with those
peculiar and higher truths disclosed by revelation. All I contend for is,
that scientific truth, illustrating as it does the divine character,
plans, and government, ought to fan and feed the flame of true piety in
the hearts of its cultivators. He, therefore, who knows the most of
science ought most powerfully to feel this religious influence. He is not
confined, like the great mass of men, to the outer court of nature's
magnificent temple, but he is admitted to the interior, and allowed to
trace its long halls, aisles, and galleries, and gaze upon its lofty domes
and arches; nay, as a priest he enters the _penetralia_, the holy of
holies, where sacred fire is always burning upon the altars, where hovers
the glorious Schekinah, and where, from a full orchestra, the anthem of
praise is ever ascending. Petrified, indeed, must be his heart, if it
catches none of the inspiration of such a spot. He ought to go forth from
it among his fellow-men with radiant glory on his face, like Moses from
the holy mount. He who sees most of God in his works ought to show the
stamp of divinity upon his character, and lead an eminently holy life.
_Finally, the subject gives great interest and dignity to the study of
science._
It is not strange that the religious man should sometimes find his ardor
damped in the pursuit of some branches of knowledge, by the melancholy
reflection that they can be of no use beyond this world, and will exist
only as objects of memory in eternity. He may have devoted many a toilsome
year to the details and manipulations of the arts; and, so far as this
world is concerned, his labors have been eminently salutary and
interesting. But all his labors and researches can be of no avail on the
other side of the grave; and he cannot but feel sad that so much study and
efforts should leave results no more permanent. Or he may have given his
best days to loading his memory with those tongues which the Scriptures
assure us shall cease; or to those details of material organization which
can have no place or antitype in the future world. Interesting,
therefore, as such pursuits have been on earth, nay, indispensable as they
are to the well being and progress of human society, it is melancholy to
realize that they form a part of that knowledge which will vanish away.