DEEPER HARMONIES OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION. 69 



question is nothing less than this, whether we are to regard the grave 

 with assured hope, and the ties between human beings as indissoluble 

 by death ; or, on the other hand, to dismiss the thought of a future 

 life as too doubtful to be worth considering, even if not absolutely 

 chimerical. No reasoning can make such a difference into a small one. 

 But even where the differences are so great, it may still be worth 

 while to call attention to the points of agreement. In our penury of 

 truth we ought to make the very utmost of our agreements. Let us 

 rescue whatever we can from the waves of doubt; sailors thrown 

 shipwrecked on a desert island must save what they can, not what 

 they would. If there is some truth, however small, upon which all 

 can agree, then there is some action upon which all can unite ; and 

 who can tell how much may be done by any thing so rare as absolute 

 unanimity? Moreover, if we look closely, we shall always find our 

 agreement to be more than we had expected. It seems as if men 

 valued difference of opinion for its own sake. We seem not to care 

 for any doctrine that is not controvertible, "VYe talk with contempt 

 of platitudes and truisms. Platitudes and truisms do not work up 

 into interesting books; but, if our object is to accomplish something 

 for human life, we shall scarcely find any truth serviceable that has 

 not been rubbed into a truism, and scarcely any maxim that has not 

 been worn into a platitude. But men seldom apply to truths this test 

 of practice ; they try them by the other test, which is the test of talk 

 and debate. Thus it happens that ten points of agreement seem less 

 important in most assemblies than one point of difference. Why is it 

 men do not discover by experience the waste that is caused by this 

 method ? Either they must have a great deal of time on their hands, 

 or else they have most unreasonable expectations from controversy. 

 But I return to my point. 



We are all familiar with the language used by Christians in dis- 

 paragement of learning. God, they say, has revealed to men all 

 that is essential for them to know. By the side of revealed knowl- 

 edge what the human intellect can discover for itself is of little im- 

 portance. If it seem to clash with revelation, it is mischievous ; if 

 not, it may be useful in a subordinate degree. But at the best it is 

 contemptible by the side of the " one thing needful ; " and the great- 

 est discoverer that ever lived is a trifler compared with the most 

 simple-minded Christian who has studied to fulfill the requirements 

 of the gospel. 



There are indeed a true erudition and a true philosophy, the subject 

 of which is God's revelation itself. Scholars, profoundly read in the 

 sources of theology, whether they be supposed to be the Bible or the 

 Fathers of the Church; philosophers who have made the Christian 

 revelation their basis, or have collected and elucidated the evidence 

 of it these are truly wise, and escape the censure of frivolity under 

 which secular learning lies; but even these, illustrious and venerable 



