Sceptical within the bounds of decorum and good taste, the assiduous devotions of his wife and the endless catechisms of his daughters had resulted in his being impeached7 of clericalism in the ministerial70 bureaux, whilst certain speeches that had been attributed to him were used against him, both by professing8 Catholics and professional patriots9. Foiled in his ambitions, he still meant to live in his own way, and having failed to learn how to please, tried discreetly10 to displease11.
On this peaceful and radiant evening M. Bergeret, seeing the head of the high seminary coming along his usual road, advanced several paces to meet the priest and joined him under the first elm-trees on the Mall.
“To me the place is happy where I meet you,” said Abbé Lantaigne, who loved, before a university man, to air his harmless literary affectations.
In a few very vague phrases they made a mutual12 confession13 of the great pity aroused in them both by the world in which they lived. It was Abbé Lantaigne alone who deplored14 the decay of this ancient city, so rich, during the Middle Ages, in knowledge and thought, and now subject to a few petty tradesmen and freemasons. In frank opposition15 to this, M. Bergeret said:
“In days gone by men were just what they are now; that is to say, moderately good and moderately bad.”
“Not so!” answered M. Lantaigne. “Men were vigorous in character and strong in doctrine16 when Raymond the Great, surnamed the balsamic doctor,71 taught in this town the epitome17 of human knowledge.”
The professor and the priest sat down on a stone bench where two old men, pale-faced and decrepit18, were already sitting without saying a word. In front of this bench, green meadows, wreathed in light mist, stretched gently downwards19 to the poplars that fringed the river.
“Monsieur l’abbé,” said the professor, “I have, like everybody else, turned over the pages of the Hortus and the Thesaurus of Raymond the Great in the municipal library. Moreover, I have read the new book that Abbé Cazeaux has devoted20 to the balsamic doctor. Now, what struck me in that book?…”
“Abbé Cazeaux is one of my pupils,” interrupted M. Lantaigne. “His book on Raymond the Great is based on facts, which is praiseworthy; it is founded on theology, which is still more praiseworthy and rare, for theology is lost in this decadent21 France, which was the greatest of the nations as long as she was the most theological.”
“This book of M. Cazeaux’s,” answered M. Bergeret, “appeared to me to be interesting from several points of view. For want of a knowledge of theology I lost myself in it more than once. Yet I fancied I could see in it that the blessed Raymond, rigidly22 orthodox monk23 as he was, claimed for72 the teacher the right of professing two contradictory24 opinions on the same subject, the one theological and in accordance with revelation, the other purely25 human and based on experience or reason. The balsamic doctor, whose statue adorns26 so sternly the courtyard of the Archbishop’s palace, maintained, according to what I have been able to understand, that one and the same man may deny, as an observer or as a disputant, the truths which, as a Christian27, he believes and confesses. And it seemed to me that your pupil, M. Cazeaux, approved of a system so strange.”
Abbé Lantaigne, quite animated28 by what he had just heard, drew his red silk handkerchief from his pocket, unfurled it like a flag, and with flushed face and mouth wide open flung himself fearlessly on the challenge thrown down.
“Monsieur Bergeret, as to whether one can have, on the same subject, two distinct opinions, the one theological and of divine origin, the other purely rational or experimental and of human origin, that is a question which I answer in the affirmative. And I am going to prove to you the truth of this apparent contradiction by a most common instance. When, seated in your study, before your table loaded with books and papers, you exclaim, ‘It is incredible! I have just this moment put my paper-knife on this table and now I do not see it there.73 I see it, I’m sure I see it, and yet I no longer see it,’ when you think in this way, Monsieur Bergeret, you have two contradictory opinions with respect to the same object, one that your paper-knife is on the table because it ought to be there: that opinion is based on reason; the other that your paper-knife is not on the table, because you do not see it there: that opinion is based on experience. There you have two irreconcilable29 opinions on the same subject. And they are simultaneous. You affirm at the same time both the presence and the absence of the paper-knife. You exclaim, ‘It is there, I am sure of it,’ at the very moment you are proving it is not there.”
And, having finished his demonstration30, Abbé Lantaigne waved his chequered, snuff-besprinkled silk handkerchief, like the flaming banner of scholasticism.
But the professor of literature was not convinced. He had no difficulty in showing the emptiness of this sophism31. He replied quite gently in the rather weak voice that he habitually32 husbanded, that, in looking for his paper-knife, he experienced fear and hope, by turns and not simultaneously33, the result of an uncertainty34 which could not last; for it ended by his making sure whether the knife was on the table or not.
“There is nothing, monsieur l’abbé,” added he, “nothing in this instance of the boxwood knife that is applicable to the contradictory judgment35 which the74 blessed Raymond, or M. Cazeaux, or you yourself, might form on such or such a fact recorded in the Bible, when you state that it is at the same time both true and false. Allow me, in my turn, to give you an instance. I choose,—not, of course, in order to ensnare you, but because this incident comes of its own accord into my mind,—I choose the story of Joshua causing the sun to stand still.?…”
M. Bergeret passed his tongue over his lips and smiled. For in truth he was, in the secret places of his soul, a Voltairean:
“… Joshua causing the sun to stand still. Will you tell me, straight out, monsieur l’abbé, that Joshua made the sun stand still and did not make it stand still?”
The head of the high seminary had by no means an air of embarrassment36. Splendid controversialist as he was, he turned to his opponent with flashing eyes and heaving breast.
“After every reservation has been expressly made with respect to the true interpretation38, both literal and spiritual, of the passage in Judges which you attack and against which so many unbelievers have blindly dashed themselves before you, I will reply to you fearlessly. Yes, I have two distinct opinions as to the interpretation of this miracle. I believe as a natural philosopher, for reasons drawn39 from physics, that is to say, from observation, that the earth turns75 round a motionless sun. And as a theologian I believe that Joshua caused the sun to stand still. There is here a contradiction. But this contradiction is not irreconcilable. I will prove it to you at once. For the idea which we form of the sun is purely human; it only concerns man and could not be applicable to God. For man, the sun does not turn round the earth. I grant it, and I am willing to decide in favour of Copernicus. But I will not go so far as to force God to become a Copernican like myself, and I shall not inquire whether, for God, the sun turns or does not turn round the earth. To speak truly, I had no need of the text of Judges in order to know that our human astronomy is not the astronomy of God. Speculations40 as to time, number and space do not embrace infinity41, and it is a mad idea to wish to entangle42 the Holy Spirit in a physical or mathematical difficulty.”
“Then,” asked the professor, “you admit that, even in mathematics, it is permissible43 to have two contradictory opinions, the one human, the other divine?”
“I will not risk being reduced to that extremity,” answered Abbé Lantaigne. “There is in mathematics an exactitude which practically reconciles it with absolute truth. Numbers, on the contrary, are only dangerous because the reason, being tempted44 to seek in them for its own principle, runs the risk of76 going so far astray as to see nothing in the universe save a system of numbers. This error has been condemned45 by the Church. Yet I will answer you boldly that human mathematics are not divine mathematics. Doubtless, however, it would not be possible for one to contradict the other, and I prefer to believe that you do not wish to make me say that for God three and three can make nine. But we do not know all the properties of numbers, and God does.
“I hear that there are priests, regarded as eminent46, who maintain that science ought to agree with theology. I detest47 this impertinence, I will say this impiety48, for there is a certain impiety in making the immutable49 and absolute truth walk in harmony with that imperfect and provisional truth which is called science. This madness of assimilating reality to appearance, the body to the soul, has produced a multitude of miserable50, baneful51 opinions through which the apologists of this period have allowed their foolhardy feebleness to be seen. One, a distinguished52 member of the Society of Jesus, admits the plurality of inhabited worlds; he allows that intelligent beings may inhabit Mars and Venus, provided that to the earth there be reserved the privilege of the Cross, by which it again becomes unique and peculiar53 in the Creation. The other, a man who not without some merit occupied in the77 Sorbonne the chair of theology which has since been abolished, grants that the geologist54 can trace the vestiges55 of preadamites and reduces the Genesis of the Bible to the organisation56 of one province of the universe for the sojourn57 of Adam and his seed. O dull folly58! O pitiable boldness! O ancient novelties, already condemned a hundred times! O violation59 of sacred unity60! How much better, like Raymond the Great and his historian, to proclaim that science and religion ought no more to be confused with each other than the relative and the absolute, the finite and the infinite, the darkness and the light!”
“Monsieur l’abbé,” said the professor, “you despise science.”
The priest shook his head.
“Not so, Monsieur Bergeret, not so! I hold, on the contrary, according to the example of Saint Thomas Aquinas and all the great doctors, that science and philosophy ought to be held in high esteem61 in the schools.
“One does not despise science without despising reason; one does not despise reason without despising man; one does not despise man without insulting God. The rash scepticism which lays the blame on human reason is the first step towards that criminal scepticism that defies the divine mysteries. I value science as a gift which comes to us from God.78 But if God has given us science, he has not given us His science. His geometry is not ours. Ours speculates on one plane or in space; His works in infinitude. He has not deceived us: that is why I consider that there is a true human science. He has not taught us all: that is why I declare the powerlessness of this science, even though true, to agree with the truth of truths. And this discrepancy62, every time that it occurs between the two, I see without fear: it proves nothing, neither against heaven, nor earth.”
M. Bergeret confessed that this system seemed to him as clever as it was bold, and ultimately consonant63 with the interests of the faith.
“But,” added he, “it is not our Archbishop’s doctrine. In his pastoral letters, Monseigneur Charlot speaks voluntarily of the truths of religion being confirmed by the discoveries of science, and especially by the experiments of M. Pasteur.”
“Oh!” answered Abbé Lantaigne in a nasal voice that hissed64 with scorn, “His Eminence65 observes, in philosophy at least, the vow66 of evangelical poverty.”
At the moment when this phrase was lashing37 the air beneath the quincunxes, a corpulent great-coat, capped by a wide clerical hat, passed in front of the bench.
“Speak lower, monsieur l’abbé,” said the professor; “Abbé Guitrel hears you.”
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
promenade
|
|
| n./v.散步 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
displeasing
|
|
| 不愉快的，令人发火的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
faculty
|
|
| n.才能；学院，系；(学院或系的)全体教学人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
prudence
|
|
| n.谨慎，精明，节俭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
disillusioned
|
|
| a.不再抱幻想的，大失所望的，幻想破灭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
impeached
|
|
| v.控告（某人）犯罪( impeach的过去式和过去分词 )；弹劾；对（某事物）怀疑；提出异议 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
professing
|
|
| 声称( profess的现在分词 )； 宣称； 公开表明； 信奉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
patriots
|
|
| 爱国者，爱国主义者( patriot的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
discreetly
|
|
| ad.(言行)审慎地，慎重地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
displease
|
|
| vt.使不高兴，惹怒；n.不悦，不满，生气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
confession
|
|
| n.自白，供认，承认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
deplored
|
|
| v.悲叹，痛惜，强烈反对( deplore的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
epitome
|
|
| n.典型，梗概 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
decrepit
|
|
| adj.衰老的，破旧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
downwards
|
|
| adj./adv.向下的（地），下行的（地） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
decadent
|
|
| adj.颓废的，衰落的，堕落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
rigidly
|
|
| adv.刻板地，僵化地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
monk
|
|
| n.和尚，僧侣，修道士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
contradictory
|
|
| adj.反驳的，反对的，抗辩的；n.正反对，矛盾对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
adorns
|
|
| 装饰，佩带( adorn的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
animated
|
|
| adj.生气勃勃的，活跃的，愉快的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
irreconcilable
|
|
| adj.（指人）难和解的，势不两立的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
demonstration
|
|
| n.表明，示范，论证，示威 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
sophism
|
|
| n.诡辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
habitually
|
|
| ad.习惯地，通常地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
simultaneously
|
|
| adv.同时发生地，同时进行地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
uncertainty
|
|
| n.易变，靠不住，不确知，不确定的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
embarrassment
|
|
| n.尴尬；使人为难的人(事物)；障碍；窘迫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
lashing
|
|
| n.鞭打；痛斥；大量；许多v.鞭打( lash的现在分词 )；煽动；紧系；怒斥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
interpretation
|
|
| n.解释，说明，描述；艺术处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
infinity
|
|
| n.无限，无穷，大量 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
entangle
|
|
| vt.缠住，套住；卷入，连累 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
permissible
|
|
| adj.可允许的，许可的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
detest
|
|
| vt.痛恨，憎恶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
impiety
|
|
| n.不敬；不孝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
immutable
|
|
| adj.不可改变的，永恒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
miserable
|
|
| adj.悲惨的，痛苦的；可怜的，糟糕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
baneful
|
|
| adj.有害的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
geologist
|
|
| n.地质学家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
vestiges
|
|
| 残余部分( vestige的名词复数 )； 遗迹； 痕迹； 毫不 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
sojourn
|
|
| v./n.旅居，寄居；逗留 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
violation
|
|
| n.违反(行为)，违背(行为)，侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
esteem
|
|
| n.尊敬，尊重；vt.尊重，敬重；把…看作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
discrepancy
|
|
| n.不同；不符；差异；矛盾 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
consonant
|
|
| n.辅音；adj.[音]符合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
hissed
|
|
| 发嘶嘶声( hiss的过去式和过去分词 )； 发嘘声表示反对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
eminence
|
|
| n.卓越，显赫；高地，高处；名家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
vow
|
|
| n.誓(言)，誓约；v.起誓，立誓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |