in course ment. the usefulness and credit of Christianity.' But such objectors fail to perceive that the continued existence of warfare is a result of man's moral nature remaining unchanged, and this perhaps by an express provision of nature, wars being a main element in the course of rudimentary civilization at the least. No doubt, it is the work of the Religion These are of Christ to bring about this change. It does so of fulfilby substituting larger and unselfish sympathies; by reducing the theory of war to a defensive instead of an offensive basis." But His kingdom upon the earth in the hearts and spirits of men, though universal, was to be created slowly by suasion, not by miracle. There is no engagement on its part to abolish selfishness, passion, sin, speedily or throughout. By slow advances in individual sanctification a higher level was to be reached of moral type, of peacefulness and love. The present com- Increased parative rarity of war in respect of former ages is wars. admitted. Little by little, it may be hoped, this scourge is retreating before the march of civilization. Trade, law, diplomacy, literature, political 1 See Mr. Buckle, Hist. Civ., I. 191. Mr. Lecky, Hist. Rat., II. 384, arguing from a general immemorial union between the sacerdotal and the military spirit, infers that no theological agencies are pacific. This is hardly convincing. See also H. E. M., II. 269. 2 See Comte, Phil. Pos., V. 82. Mr. Freeman (Norman Cong., I. 33) observes, "the evangelical precepts of peace and love did not put an end to war; they did not put an end to aggressive conquests, but they distinctly humanized the way in which war was carried on." 3 Compare Dr. Mozley, Bamp. Lect., p. 17: "We can, indeed, in imagination conceive," &c. rarity of due to influence. science, even the invention of fire-arms and improved means of locomotion, have been assigned a share in this momentous change.' But has the Christian religious sentiment been altogether without part in it; and among other elements is no effect to be attributed to the spread of a purer Christianity? An under-current of humiliation mixes now with the Te Deums of victory; and ministers of mercy claim their place in the ranks of contending armies. A growing sense of the folly of war may be due to advancing culture; a conviction of its wickedness can only spring from a Religion whose mission upon earth is "peace, good will toward men.' Relations between science and Christianity. § 11. We have been led more than once in our preceding remarks to the confines of a subject which, in our review of objections to the progress and permanence of Christianity, is the last awaiting examination; I mean, the relations between Science and Religion; their distinctive position and Whether respective consummation. Is this peace or war? to the per- Is a modus vivendi practicable between them? Or do they necessarily and eternally conflict? As darkness flees at the approach of dawn, must one pale before the other's rising beams; and is this the fate reserved for the time-honoured claims formidable manence of our religion. 1 See Buckle, u. s., I. 203, 224. Christian efforts in this direction, put forth in the darkest and most violent ages, even where unsuccessful, should not be disparaged. Such were the "Peace of God," the "Truce of God" (the former having the wider scope), and the like. See Gieseler, II. 447. Robertson, Church Hist., II. 504-5; also Lecky, Hist. Rat., II. 115. of some, conflict them. of Religion, as hitherto understood; and in especial for the faith of Jesus Christ, under the full light and fierce heat of a noontide civilization? Some, it is true, still hold that a real conflict In the view between Science and Religion is in the nature of no real things unlikely or impossible. "Not only are the between two heterogeneous; but the results of Science, whether physical or human, are part of the data which it is the function of Religion to co-ordinate." "The time is approaching," says a careful and impartial writer," "when it will be generally perceived that, so far from Science being opposed to Religion, true Religion without Science is impossible. And if we consider the various aspects of Christianity as understood by different nations, we can hardly fail to perceive that the dignity, and therefore the truth, of their religious beliefs is in direct relation to the knowledge of Science and of the great physical laws by which our universe is governed." "The natural works of God," wrote Faraday," "can never by any possibility come in contradiction with the higher things which belong to our future existence I do not think it at all necessary to tie the study of the Natural Sciences and Religion together." On the other hand, a multitude of reasons have Opposite been adduced to weaken this position. "Of all anta view. gonisms of belief," says Mr. Herbert Spencer, "the oldest, the widest, the most profound, and the most important, is that between Religion and Science. It commenced when the recognition of the simplest uniformities in surrounding things set a limit to the previously universal fetishism. It shows itself everywhere throughout the domain of human knowledge, affecting man's interpretations alike of the simplest mechanical accidents and of the most complicated events in the histories of nations. It has its roots deep down in the diverse habits of thought Appeals to of different orders of minds."" Then the tests of history and experience, it is said, prove the uniform undeviating growth of knowledge, and a corresponding decline in the power and spread of Religion. This, indeed, is a matter of fact, and, as such, admits a direct reply. But next, it is added, there are circumstances to explain this alleged reGrounds sult. All advance is intellectual; Religion is of its opinion. own nature stationary, conservative, reactionary. This is the very moral of the history of Persecution experi ence. of this 1 First Principles, p. 12. 2 Prof. Huxley takes up different ground: "The present antagonism between theology and science does not arise from any assumption by the men of science that all theology must necessarily be excluded from science; but simply because they are unable to allow that reason and morality have two weights and two measures; and that the belief in a proposition because authority tells you it is true, or because you wish to believe it, which is a high crime and misdemeanor when the subject-matter of reason is of one kind, becomes, under the alias of 'faith,' the greatest of all virtues when the subject-matter of reason is of another kind."-Cont. Rev., XVIII. 457. for belief. Again, Revelation is incompatible not only with the claims of Reason, but with the results of Science. The advance of knowledge undermines the bases of religious beliefs by impairing the states of mind on which they repose, and the needs for which they exist. By explaining phenomena, by reducing them to universal invariable expressions, by substituting continued for free agency, most existing religions, all in fact but a religion of Nature, if such really exists, are merged in the scale of superstitions unworthy of scientific acceptance. For the sphere of Knowledge is held to be positive; the real is bounded by the realm of sensation; all beyond is chimerical, is vain. Wonder recedes as the antecedents of all phenomena become known; and with wonder fear, and with fear reverence, and with reverence adoration, and with adoration the caput mortuum of religious belief. of this denied. § 12. Not to admit a fact is, of course, to disallow The truth the reasons by which it is sought to be explained. view If Religion (I speak more particularly of the Faith of Jesus Christ) exhibits no decline, it may be held unnecessary to dispute the alleged conditions of such a catastrophe. It may be well, notwithstanding, to encounter the particular objections against the prospects of Christianity which have been here Reasons brought within view. They affect its past as well ing it in as its future, explaining its successes by other than spiritual antecedents, and denying it a career in the for meet detail. |