Prof. Winehell's Reply To "w."

Editor Rkgistkk : ls8Íbly thecommuaicationsigned 'W ' in your issue of December 23, requiren Irom me a few word of reply. I very rarely notice any criticism however un just, and more rarely anonymous one; but gome of your readers may think "W" has quieted the claim that science has any bearing on reliious faith, ad I wish simply to state that "W" has valiantly overthrown a position I never assu'ned. Thb Register's reprt of my lectures in Mrmphis I happen to have overlooked entirely ; but it is evidently a reporter's condensed statement, with omission of certain things which prove to be essen'.ial. 1 nave never taught that natural science in lts own character and previ ace proves anything bey nd the realm of sensible things, and this seems to be the position of "W." I do teach, however, that natural science puts ui in possusion of facis which philosophy is bound to interpret in a spiritual sense. I teach that the science of natural things gives activity to only one department of our intelligence ; another department ranges over the realm of supersensible truth ; and both activities are equally legitímate, and equally n MM sary to a symmetrictl di-velopment ol the soul and a sound fsbric of knowledge. January 5, 1887