850 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



intellect, even of the same order, may be 

 able to mirror the whole past and the whole 

 future; if the universe is peopled by a 

 medium of such a nature that a magnetic 

 needle on the earth answers to a commotion 

 in the sun, an omnipresent agent is also con- 

 ceivable ; if our insignificant knowledge 

 gives us some influence over events, prac- 

 tical omniscience may confer indefinably 

 greater power." Thus the principle of scien- 

 tific naturalism of this age " leads not to the 

 denial of the existence of any supernature, 

 but simply to the denial of the validity of 

 the evidence adduced in favor of this or of 

 that extant form of supernaturalism." The 

 author here employs the words "superna- 

 ture " and " supernaturalism " in their popular 

 sense, but to him the term " Nature " covers 

 the totality of what is. The world of psy- 

 chical phenomena appears to him as much a 

 part of Nature as the world of physical phe- 

 nomena ; and he is unable to perceive any 

 reason for cutting the world into two halves, 

 one natural and one supernatural. As all of 

 the world's classics have been put to the test 

 of scientific criticism and dissection, Prof. 

 Huxley sees no reason why the Bible should 

 escape the same treatment ; and these essays, 

 as our readers may recollect, discuss certain 

 features of the biblical narrative from the 

 point of view of scientific and experimental 

 criticism. The author lays down a body of 

 " established truths," which he specifies, to 

 something like which theological speculations 

 will have to accommodate themselves. These 

 " truths " are irreconcilable with the biblical 

 cosmogony, anthropology, and theodicy, but 

 they are no less inconsistent with Voltairism 

 and kindred systems. But Prof. Huxley is 

 no enemy of the Bible. It appears to him 

 that " if there is anybody more objectionable 

 than the orthodox bibliolater it is the hetero- 

 dox Philistine, who can discover in a litera- 

 ture which, in some respects has no superior, 

 nothing but a subject for scoffing and an 

 occasion for the display of his conceited 

 ignorance of the debt he owes to former 

 generations." Twenty-two years ago he 

 pleaded for the use of the Bible as an in- 

 strument of popular education, but laid stress 

 upon the necessity of placing the instruction 

 in lay hands. He finds the further merit in 

 the Bible that both Testaments " have been 

 the great instigators of revolt against the 



worst forms of clerical and political despot- 

 ism." While not believing that the highest 

 biblical ideal is exclusive of others or needs 

 no supplement, he does believe that " the 

 human race is not yet, possibly may never 

 be, in a position to dispense with it." 



Christian Anthropology. By Rev. John 

 Thein. With an Introduction by Prof. 

 Charles G. Herbermann, Ph. D., LL. D. 

 New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzi- 

 ger Brothers. Pp. 576. 



The author of this work is pastor of St, 

 Martin's Roman Catholic Church, Liverpool, 

 Ohio. Prof. Herbermann sets forth in his 

 introduction that "the Church has taught 

 for ages that between the truths of revela- 

 tion and the truths of science there can be 

 no conflict. The Vatican Council has sol- 

 emnly repeated this teaching. On the other 

 hand, some men famed for scientific learning 

 and some famed for unscientific bluster pro- 

 claim that between faith and science no 

 reconciliation is possible. Educated Catho- 

 lics may well ask, How are such assertions 

 possible? Still, it is not hard to find the 

 explanation. If we could ascertain at once 

 what are the truths of science and what are 

 the truths of revelation, their comparison 

 would end the controversy. But what are 

 the truths of science ? " Inquiring, the pro- 

 fessor finds not the truths, but scientific 

 opinion of what they are, vacillating and not 

 wholly agreed. On the other hand, "we 

 look to the Church to tell us what are re- 

 vealed truths. . . . When the Church has 

 spoken, we know what revealed truth is. 

 But there are hundreds of opinions on dogma 

 and morals which the Church has neither 

 approved nor condemned, and thousands of 

 biblical texts the meaning of which she has 

 not defined." As it is not easy to find the 

 truths of science or of revelation in every 

 case, it is difficult to compare them with one 

 another. When doctrines seem to be in con- 

 flict, it is well to inquire whether they have 

 been established as truths by the Church on 

 the one side or by science on the other ; and 

 it is not necessary to be troubled about con- 

 flict till this has been made to appear. Never- 

 theless, there are apparent conflicts, and 

 "some scientific oracles" are doing their 

 best with them to assail the dogmas of the 

 Church. While the priests are informed only 

 respecting one side, " difficulties, arguments 



