22 ADDRESS OF 



were determined, not by the past or the present, but by events 

 still in the future. The blazing comet appeared, not in obedience 

 to a chain of causes commencing with the creation, but in order 

 that man might be warned of the coming calamity. When the 

 prayers of the righteous averted the coming storm, the cloud 

 moved aside in order that their fields and houses might be saved, 

 and when they brought down the gentle rain upon the parched 

 fields, the rain fell in order that famine might be averted. 



These supposed causes differed from what enlightened minds 

 now understand by the term Providence, in being amenable to 

 scientific investigation, and in not being included in the regular 

 chain of natural phenomena. The designs of Providence are 

 inscrutable, but those of. Pallas and Juno were not. Careful ex- 

 perimental investigation, such as might have been undertaken by 

 a Helrnholtz of that time, would have sufficed to show just how- 

 Pallas wanted the spear thrown, if the view of the Homeric age 

 was the correct one. When the King died, or the enemy was vic- 

 torious, men thought they knew exactly why the comet appeared 

 when it did. 



These views having so far vanished into thin air, I do not see 

 how we can avoid recognizing the reality of the revolution which 

 modern science claims to have made in the views of men respect- 

 ing the course of nature. And yet, as I have already shown, there 

 are many tendencies in our being which make us unwilling to 

 admit the revolution, and lead many to look upon the old theory 

 as correct, provided it were only considered as tracing causes to 

 the will of the Creator. On what is this view founded at the 

 present time? Entirely, it seems to me, in ignoring the distinction 

 between the scrutable and the inscrutable, between the seen and 

 the unseen, worlds. Science has, to a greater or less degree, ban- 

 ished final causes from the visible universe ; but they act with un- 

 diminished vigor in the invisible one. Such a translation may not 

 be a great revolution in thought from a theological point of view, 

 but it certainly is from a scientific standpoint, which considers 

 only visible things. 



I can readily imagine your asking if teleological causes can be 

 really considered as absolutely banished from the whole domain 

 of visible nature, if, considering how limited our knowledge, and 

 how vast that part even of the visible universe which we do not 



