the change brought about in the science of astronomy through Copernicus
in the sixteenth century, the founding of exact science through Galileo
in the seventeenth century, and the theory of evolution propounded by
Darwin and his followers in the nineteenth century. The whole tendency
has been to describe and explain Nature in terms of mechanism, and to
extend such mechanism into the life of man. Proof after proof has poured
upon us, and has been the means, on the whole, of establishing a kingdom
of mechanism within the realm of Nature and of human nature. Theology
and speculative philosophy went on their courses unheedful of these
developments of physical science, until in our day both have had to
reconsider the tenableness of their position, and to see that Nature and
its physical manifestations have to enter as all-important factors into
their reconstructions. Miracle is now relegated to a secondary place in
theology, and it has disappeared altogether from science; a Supreme
Being transcendent of, and immanent in, the world is not known to
science, however far it reaches into the secrets of Nature. Doubtless
the loss to religion has been here incalculable; for although the
natural scientist was able to destroy the old building, [p.61] he was
unable to construct a new one. And Eucken shows that the natural
scientist will remain unable to accomplish this, because the material
with which he deals is physical in its nature and constitutes no more
than a part--a secondary part--of what is found in the world.

The old mode of conceiving the universe, when driven from its citadel by
the new conceptions of physics and astronomy, turned for refuge to the
mystery of Life itself. Here it supposed itself to be safe. But the
development of modern chemistry and biology shows how dangerous it is to
base a theological and religious superstructure on the unfilled clefts
of natural science. The lesson here during the past hundred years ought
to be a grave warning against its repetition in the future. These clefts