321 
him ; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually 
discerned.” There is nothing strange in this ; the very same 
might be said, mutatis mutandis, of the inability of the merely 
scientific mind to discern the true beauty of the universe. 
The only difference is that in the case of the spiritual faculty 
required to distinguish revealed truth, the incapacity arises 
from an unwillingness to receive a divine gift, and to come 
into the light. And further it must be observed, that although 
this applies only to the reception of the abstract truth, yet 
this has from the nature of the case but one concrete form. 
If, for example, the Incarnation and the Atonement are recog- 
nized by the spiritual mind as realities, — we may say, indeed, 
as necessary truths, — the reality can only be found in the 
history of Him, Who was born at Bethlehem, Who died on 
Calvary, and rose again on the third day from the grave. 
Those only who do not apprehend or appreciate the spiritual 
truths question the supernatural history. 
14. It is unnecessary for our present purpose to discuss 
further the distinctions which have been indicated, but we may 
observe generally that, although each higher sphere of thought 
contains nothing contradictory to those which precede it in 
order, yet the ideas of the lower do not of themselves direct us 
to the higher, but they may in some cases even seem to be 
opposed to it. Even so the Jews thought that the righteous- 
ness of faith contradicted the law, and believed they did God 
service by persecuting the Church. Some new power is 
required in order to pass from one phase or sphere of thought 
to that which is higher. The attempt, for example, to rise by 
the means of scientific ideas, without any other powers, to 
those of religious belief and knowledge, is even more futile 
than it would be to endeavour to become an artist by the 
study of Euclid, or a poet by the aid of the diffei*ential 
calculus. 
15. But having so far cleared the ground by determining 
what must be the special spheres of scientific thought and 
religious belief, the latter of which includes both belief in God 
as the Sovereign and Almighty Will, and belief in those rela- 
tions of God to the universe which are revealed in J esus Christ, 
we may now turn to the question of the relation of these two, 
and, specially — for this is all I propose to examine — of the 
claim on the part of physical science to limit and control reli- 
gious belief. We do not find any claim asserted of its autho- 
rity over art or poetry. It would be absurd to consider science 
as capable of interfering with, or limiting, the aesthetic view 
of the universe. Why, then, is it to be supposed that reli- 
gion should be subject to its authority ? There seem to be 
only two reasons for allowing such a claim that can be given 
