628 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



I would fain " labor " with you, as some 

 of our religious brethren say. It grieves 

 me that you hold that an antagonism be- 

 tween loving obedience to God Religion, 

 and intelligent study of God^s works Sci- 

 ence, is "natural," "inevitable," "whole- 

 some." If that be true it would seem to 

 follow that the more religious a man is the 

 less scientific he can be, or, what is worse, 

 that the more scientific a man the less re- 

 ligious can he be ! Really you cannot mean 

 what your statements logically convey. You 

 cannot mean to teach that, the more wick- 

 ed a man is, the better he is prepared for 

 scientific investigation. But do not your 

 words mean that ? 



To prove that there is a necessary conflict 

 you call attention to " the attitude of mind 

 of the great mass of devout and sincerely 

 religious people toward the more advanced 

 conclusions and scientific men of the pres- 

 ent day." Who can tell what attitude that 

 is ? Each man knows his circle of ac- 

 quaintances ; and here is my testimony : All 

 " the devout and sincerely religious people " 

 with whom I am acquainted accept all the 

 " conclusions " of science so far as they 

 know them. Some of them go further, and 

 accept even the hypotheses and guesses of 

 the most poetic and superstitious of "the sci- 

 entific men of the day." Thebody of devout 

 religious people, however, it is fair to add, 

 do not accept all the guesses. All that can 

 be reasonably asked of the religious people 

 is that they shall accept as scientific " con- 

 clusions " only those teachings of science 

 in regard to which there is no controversy 

 among scientific men. A case cannot be 

 called " concluded " while the argument is 

 going on in court. The rotundity of the 

 earth, the heliocentric theory, Kepler's three 

 laws, are " concluded." No scientific man 

 of repute expresses the slightest doubt of 

 those, and the attitude of religious people 

 toward them is one of thorough acceptance 

 and genuine faith. There are some religious 

 people who are evolutionists. Some are 

 not. But the scientific men, " cis such" are 

 just as much divided, so that that question 

 cannot be called concluded. 



As to the attitude of religious people 



toward advanced scientific men, it would 

 be difficult to determine, because it would 

 be difficult to determine who are the " ad- 

 vanced " scientific men. Whenever they 

 settle that among themselves, your question 

 will really have great importance ; but, if 

 a clique should cry up one man as a burn- 

 ing and shining light in science, while the 

 French Academy should be reported to 

 have rejected him when nominated for mem- 

 bership, on the ground that It is not scien- 

 tific, need religious people have any attitude 

 toward him at all ? 



But that there is no hostile attitude 

 toward scientific men is shown by the fact 

 that any scientific lecturer of ability may 

 come from Europe to America, and the de- 

 vout and religious people of the country 

 will go in throngs to hear him, and pay lib- 

 erally for the privilege. 



You close your article by expressing the 

 opinion that a "desirable consummation" 

 to " reach " would be " the entire indiffer- 

 ence of religious people, as such, to the re- 

 sults of scientific inquiry." This is amaz- 

 ing. How can they be ? Religious people 

 who are not scientific know very well, hav- 

 ing had their attention freshly called thereto 

 by Dr. White, the great benefits conferred 

 on religion by the progress of science, which, 

 as he admirably says, has " given to religion 

 great new foundations, great new ennobling 

 conceptions, a great new revelation of the 

 might of God." Religious people owe too 

 much to science, while science owes almost 

 every thing to religious people, to allow 

 them to become entirely indifferent, and give 

 up science wholly to irreligious men. 



One thing let us agree on befoi-e we part. 

 Nothing is advanced and no one is profited 

 if religious men write and speak as though 

 no man could be scientific and at the same 

 time religious ; nor is any thing profited if 

 men professing to be scientific talk of re- 

 ligious people patronizinglj', as if they were 

 simpletons. Can you not say " Amen " to 

 that, and shake hands with 



Very respectfully and truly yours, 



Charles F. Deems. 



Chtteoh op the Strangbes, I 



New York, January 2T, 1876. ) 



