Encyclopedia of sacred theology - pagina 409

1

Chap.

TO JUDGE THE SPECIAL PRINCIPIUM ?

II]

condition of his

own

being, nor of his reason.

385

In a religious-

you may indeed say, that the impulse of his but this does not make opposition is enmity against God within the domain of man of science, as a dishonest him present themthey actually premises, as his He takes logic. that in the with you, acknowledges selves to him, and so far ethical sense

;

natural principium there

us

;

is

something that does not satisfy

but he disputes that, for the present at

least, it

needs to

and more still, that the satisfaction, of which you boast, is anything more than appearance. Hence the dispute can advance no farther than the acknowledgment of antinomies in our consciousness and the insuf-' satisfy us,

ficiency of our reason to satisfy entirely our thirst after

But where the recognition

knowledge.

to the conclusion of the

the

iiecessity

of the

of this leads you

Sacred Scripture,

rationalist either stops with the recognition of

this

disharmony, or glides over into other theories, which allow

And to limit liimself to the natural principium. rather than call in the aid of another principium with you,

him

he will cast himself into the arms of materialism, which releases him at once from the search after an infinite world,

which then does not exist. All the trouble, therefore, tliat men have given themselves to make advance, by logical argument, from the acknowledgment of the insufficiency of our reason as a starting-point, has been a vain expenditure of strength.

The

so-called Doctrine of Principles (Princi-

may have

served to strengthen in his conviction one who has confessed the special principium and to shield prevailing tradition from passing too rapidly into oblivion it has never provided force of proof against the opponent. pienlehre)

;

;

He who

is

kingdom

not born of water and the Spirit, cannot see the God, and the human mind is sufficiently invent-

of

modify its tactics, Avhenever you imagine that you have gained your point, that your proof is bound to lose its force. It is a little different, of course, when you touch the ive so to

strings of the emotions, or appeal to the " seed of religion " ; but then you enter upon another domain, and cease to draw

conclusions from logical premises.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen