Free thought; Modernism (Christian theology) -- Catholic Church; Religion and science; Teaching, Freedom of
Until about a hundred years ago scientists almost universally
thought it impossible for a stone to fall from the skies—not to
mention a rain of stones. Of the big meteor that fell at Agram in
1751 the learned Vienna professor, _Stuetz_, wrote in 1790 as
follows: “That iron had fallen from the skies may have been
believed in Germany in 1751 even by its enlightened minds, owing
to the uncertainty then prevailing in regard to physics and
natural history. In our times, however, it were unpardonable to
consider similar fairy tales even probable.” Some museums threw
away their collections of meteors, fearing they would appear
ridiculous by keeping them. In that very year, 1790, a meteor fell
near the city of Juillac in France, and the mayor of the town sent
a report of it to the French Academy of Sciences, signed by three
hundred eye-witnesses. But the wise men of the academy knew
better. Referee _Bertholon_ said: “It is a pity for a town to have
so foolish a mayor,” and added: “It is sad to see the whole
municipality certifying by affidavit to a folk-saga that can only
be pitied. What more can I say of an affidavit like that? Comment
is self-evident to a philosophically trained mind who reads this
authentic testimonial about an evidently false fact, about a
physically impossible phenomenon.” _A. Deluc_, in other respects a
sober-minded man, and a scientist, even remarked that should a
stone like that fall before his feet, then he would have to admit
that he had seen it, but nevertheless would not believe it.
_Vaudin_ remarked: “Better to deny such incredible things than to
have to try to explain them.” Thus taught the French Academy of
that time (apud _Braun_, Ueber Kosmogonie, 3d ed., 1905, 378
_seq._). And now science is teaching the contrary. Everybody knows
that such falling meteors are not only possible, but that they
fall about seven hundred times a year on our earth.
Do not these examples bear a striking resemblance to the attitude of many
of the representatives of modern science towards facts and truths of our
faith?
This has not been said with a view of detracting from the reputation of
science. Not at all. It has fallen to the lot of man to be subject to
error. The above was said to recall that fact. Science is not so
infallible as to be able to claim the right to ignore, in religious and
ethical questions, faith and the Church, and even to usurp the place of
the faith given by God, in order to lead its disciples upon the new paths
of a delivered mankind.
Chapter III. Unprepossession Of Research.
What It Is.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account