按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
stined to grow out of their beautiful and artless narratives。
＇26＇ Hecker's Epidemics of the Middle Ages； pp。 87…152。
The incapacity to appreciate this frame of mind renders the current arguments in behalf of miracles utterly worthless。 From the fact that Celsus and others never denied the reality of the Christian miracles； it is commonly inferred that those miracles must have actually happened。 The same argument would； however； equally apply to the miracles of Apollonius and Simon Magus； for the Christians never denied the reality of these。 What these facts really prove is that the state of human intelligence was as I have just described it： and the inference to be drawn from them is that no miraculous account emanating from an author of such a period is worthy of serious attention。 When Mr。 Rogers supposes that if the miracles had not really happened they would have been challenged； he is assuming that a state of mind existed in which it was possible for miracles to be challenged； and thus commits an anachronism as monstrous as if he had attributed the knowledge of some modern invention； such as steamboats； to those early ages。
Mr。 Rogers seems to complain of M。 Renan for 〃quietly assuming〃 that miracles are invariably to be rejected。 Certainly a historian of the present day who should not make such an assumption would betray his lack of the proper qualifications for his profession。 It is not considered necessary for every writer to begin his work by setting out to prove the first principles of historical criticism。 They are taken for granted。 And； as M。 Renan justly says； a miracle is one of those things which must be disbelieved until it is proved。 The onus probandi lies on the assertor of a fact which conflicts with universal experience。 Nevertheless； the great number of intelligent persons who； even now； from dogmatic reasons； accept the New Testament miracles； forbids that they should be passed over in silence like similar phenomena elsewhere narrated。 But； in the present state of historical science； the arguing against miracles is； as Colet remarked of his friend Erasmus's warfare against the Thomists and Scotists of Cambridge； 〃a contest more necessary than glorious or difficult。〃 To be satisfactorily established； a miracle needs at least to be recorded by an eyewitness； and the mental attainments of the witness need to be thoroughly known besides。 Unless he has a clear conception of the difference between the natural and the unnatural order of events； his testimony； however unimpeachable on the score of honesty； is still worthless。 To say that this condition was fulfilled by those who described the New Testament miracles； would be absurd。 And in the face of what German criticism has done for the early Christian documents； it would be an excess of temerity to assert that any one of the supernatural accounts contained in them rests on contemporary authority。 Of all history； the miraculous part should be attested by the strongest testimony； whereas it is invariably attested by the weakest。 And the paucity of miracles wherever we have contemporary records； as in the case of primitive Islamism； is a most significant fact。
In attempting to defend his principle of never accepting a miracle； M。 Renan has indeed got into a sorry plight； and Mr。 Rogers； in controverting him； has not greatly helped the matter。 By stirring M。 Renan's bemuddled pool； Mr。 Rogers has only bemuddled it the more。 Neither of these excellent writers seems to suspect that transmutation of species； the geologic development of the earth； and other like phenomena do not present features conflicting with ordinary experience。 Sir Charles Lyell and Mr。 Darwin would be greatly astonished to be told that their theories of inorganic and organic evolution involved any agencies not known to exist in the present course of nature。 The great achievement of these writers has been to show that all past changes of the earth and its inhabitants are to be explained as resulting from the continuous action of causes like those now in operation； and that throughout there has been nothing even faintly resembling a miracle。 M。 Renan may feel perfectly safe in extending his principle back to the beginning of things； and Mr。 Rogers's argument； even if valid against M。 Renan； does not help his own case in the least。
On some points； indeed； M。 Renan has laid himself open to severe criticism； and on other points he has furnished good handles for his orthodox opponents。 His views in regard to the authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Acts are not likely to be endorsed by many scholars； and his revival of the rationalistic absurdities of Paulus merits in most instances all that Mr。 Rogers has said about it。 As was said at the outset； orthodox criticisms upon heterodox books are always welcome。 They do excellent service。 And with the feeling which impels their authors to defend their favourite dogmas with every available weapon of controversy I for one can heartily sympathize。 Their zeal in upholding what they consider the truth is greatly to be respected and admired。 But so much cannot always be said for the mode of argumentation they adopt； which too often justifies M。 Renan's description； when he says； 〃Raisonnements triomphants sur des choses que l'adversaire n'a pas dites； cris de victoire sur des erreurs qu'il n'a pas commises； rien ne parait deloyal a celui qui croft tenir en main les interets de la verite absolue。〃
August； 1866。
VI。 DRAPER ON SCIENCE AND RELIGION。＇27＇
＇27＇ History of the Conflict between Religion and Science。 by John William Draper； M。 D。； LL。 D。 Fourth edition。 New York： D。 Appleton & Co。 1875。 12mo； pp。 xxii。； 373。 （International Scientific Series； XII。）
Some twelve years ago； Dr。 Draper published a bulky volume entitled 〃A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe；〃 in which his professed purpose was to show that nations or races pass through certain definable epochs of development； analogous to the periods of infancy； childhood； youth； manhood； and old age in individuals。 But while announced with due formality； the carrying out of the argument was left for the most part to the headings and running…titles of the several chapters； while in the text the author peacefully meandered along down the stream of time； giving us a succession of pleasant though somewhat threadbare anecdotes； as well as a superabundance of detached and fragmentary opinions on divers historical events； having apparently quite forgotten that he had started with a thesis to prove。 In the arrangement of his 〃running heads；〃 some points were sufficiently curious to require a word of explanation； as； for example； when the early ages of Christianity were at one time labelled as an epoch of progress and at another time as an epoch of decrepitude。 But the argument and the contents never got so far en rapport with each other as to clear up such points as this。 On the contrary； each kept on the even tenour of its way without much regard to the other。 From the titles of the chapters one was led to expect some comprehensive theory of European civilization continuously expounded。 But the text merely showed a great quantity of superficial and second…hand information； serving to illustrate the mental idiosyncrasies of the author。 Among these idiosyncrasies might be noted a very inadequate understanding of the part played by Rome in the work of civilization； a singular lack of appreciation of the political and philosophical achievements of Greece under Athenian leadership； a strong hostility to the Catholic Church； a curious disposition to overrate semi…barbarous。 or abortive civilizations； such as those of the old Asiatic and native American communities； at the expense of Europe； and； above all； an undiscriminating admiration for everything； great or small； that has ever worn the garb of Islam or been associated with the career of the Saracens。 The discovery that in some respects the Mussulmans of the Middle Ages were more highly cultivated than their Christian contemporaries； has made such an impression on Dr。 Draper's mind that it seems to be as hard for him to get rid of it as it was for Mr。 Dick to keep the execution of Charles I。 out of his 〃Memorial。〃 Even in an essay on the 〃Civil Policy of America；〃 the turbaned sage figures quite prominently； and it is needless to add that he reappears； as large as life； when the subject of discussion is the attitude of science toward religion。
Speaking briefly with regard to this matter； we may freely admit that the work done by the Arabs； in scientific inquiry as well as in the making of events； was very considerable。 It was a work； too； the value of which is not commonly appreciated in the accounts of European history written for the general reader； and we have no disposition to find fault with Dr。 Draper for describing it with enthusiasm。 The philosophers of Bagdad and Cordova did excellent service in keeping alive the traditions of Greek physical inquiry at a time when Christian thinkers were too exclusively occupied with transcendental speculations in theology and logic。 In some departments； as in chemistry and astronomy； they made original discoveries of considerable value； and if we turn from abstract knowledge