You are here
قراءة كتاب Catholic Churchmen in Science [First Series] Sketches of the Lives of Catholic Ecclesiastics Who Were Among the Great Founders in Science
تنويه: تعرض هنا نبذة من اول ١٠ صفحات فقط من الكتاب الالكتروني، لقراءة الكتاب كاملا اضغط على الزر “اشتر الآن"
Catholic Churchmen in Science [First Series] Sketches of the Lives of Catholic Ecclesiastics Who Were Among the Great Founders in Science
CATHOLIC CHURCHMEN IN SCIENCE
[FIRST SERIES]
SKETCHES OF THE LIVES OF CATHOLIC ECCLESIASTICS WHO WERE AMONG THE GREAT FOUNDERS IN SCIENCE
By
JAMES J. WALSH, K.ST.G., M.D., PH.D., LITT.D.
Dean and Professor of Medicine and of Nervous Diseases at Fordham University School of Medicine; Professor of Physiological Psychology in the Cathedral College, New York; Member of A.M.A., N.Y. State Med. Soc., A.A.A.S., Life Mem of N.Y. Historical Society.
SECOND EDITION
PHILADELPHIA
American Ecclesiastical Review
The Dolphin Press
MCMX.
COPYRIGHT. 1906, 1910
American Ecclesiastical Review
The Dolphin Press
"A sorrow's crown of sorrow."
THIS BOOK IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF MY MOTHER
{vii}
PREFACE.
The following sketches of the lives of clergymen who were great scientists have appeared at various times during the past five years in Catholic magazines. They were written because the materials for them had gradually accumulated during the preparation of various courses of lectures, and it seemed advisable to put them in order in such a way that they might be helpful to others working along similar lines. They all range themselves naturally around the central idea that the submission of the human reason to Christian belief, and of the mind and heart to the authority of the Church, is quite compatible with original thinking of the highest order, and with that absolute freedom of investigation into physical science, which has only too often been said to be quite impossible to churchmen. For this reason friends have suggested that they should be published together in a form in which they would be more easy of consultation than when scattered in different periodicals. It was urged, too, that they would thus also be more effective for the cause which they uphold. This friendly suggestion has been yielded to, whether justifiably or not the reader must decide for himself. There is so great a flood of books, good, bad, and indifferent, ascribing their existence to the advice of well-meaning friends, that we poor authors are evidently not in a position to judge for ourselves of the merit of our works or of the possible interest they may arouse.
{viii}
I have to thank the editors of the American Catholic Quarterly Review, of the Ave Maria, and of The Ecclesiastical Review and The Dolphin, for their kind permission to republish the articles which appeared originally in their pages. All of them, though substantially remaining the same, have been revised, modified in a number of particulars, and added to very considerably in most cases.
The call for a second edition--the third thousand--of this little book is gratifying. Its sale encouraged the preparation of a Second Series of CATHOLIC CHURCHMEN IN SCIENCE, and now the continued demand suggests a Third Series, which will be issued during the year. Some minor corrections have been made in this edition, but the book is substantially the same.
{ix}
CONTENTS.
PAGE | ||
PREFACE | ix | |
I. | THE SUPPOSED OPPOSITION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION | 3 |
II. | COPERNICUS AND HIS TIMES | 15 |
III. | BASIL VALENTINE. FOUNDER OF MODERN CHEMISTRY | 45 |
IV. | LINACRE: SCHOLAR, PHYSICIAN, PRIEST | 79 |
V. | FATHER KIRCHER, S.J. SCIENTIST, ORIENTALIST, AND COLLECTOR | 111 |
VI. | BISHOP STENSEN: ANATOMIST AND FATHER OF GEOLOGY | 137 |
VII. | ABBÉ HAÜY: FATHER OF CRYSTALLOGRAPHY | 169 |
VIII. | ABBOT MENDEL: A NEW OUTLOOK IN HEREDITY | 195 |
{x}
{1}
I.
THE SUPPOSED OPPOSITION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION.
I.
THE SUPPOSED OPPOSITION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION.
A common impression prevails that there is serious, if not invincible, opposition between science and religion. This persuasion has been minimized to a great degree in recent years, and yet sufficient of it remains to make a great many people think that, if there is not entire incompatibility between science and religion, there is at least such a diversity of purposes and aims in these two great realms of human thought that those who cultivate one field are not able to appreciate the labors of those who occupy themselves in the other. Indeed, it is usually accepted as a truth that to follow science with assiduity is practically sure to lead to unorthodoxy in religion. This is supposed to be especially true if the acquisition of scientific knowledge is pursued along lines that involve original research and new investigation. Somehow, it is thought that any one who has a mind free enough from the influence of prejudice and tradition to become an original thinker or investigator, is inevitably prone to abandon the old orthodox lines of thought in respect to religion.
Like a good many other convictions and persuasions that exist more or less as {4} commonplaces in the subconscious intellects of a great many people, this is not true. Our American humorist said that it is not so much the ignorance of mankind that makes him ridiculous as the knowing so many things "that ain't so." The supposed opposition between science and religion is precisely an apposite type of one of the things "that ain't so." It is so firmly fixed as a rule, however, that many people have accepted it without being quite conscious of the fact that it exists as one of the elements influencing many of their judgments--a very important factor in their apperception.
Now, it so happens that a number of prominent original investigators in modern science were not only thoroughly orthodox in their religious beliefs, but were even faithful clergymen and guiding spirits for others in the path of Christianity. The names of those who are included in the present volume is the best proof of this. The series of sketches was written at various times, and yet there was a central thought guiding the selection of the various scientific workers. Most of them lived at about the time when, according to an unfortunate tradition that has been very generally accepted, the Church dominated human thinking so tyrannously