
When Van Gogh painted this picture known to us all, he wrote: “it does me good to do what’s difficult. That doesn’t stop me having a tremendous need for, shall I say the word — for religion — so I go outside at night to paint the stars” (van Gogh: The Letters “To Theo van Gogh. Arles, on or about Saturday, 29 September 1888″. Van Gogh Museum. Retrieved 19 February 2012.).
When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer
Walt Whitman
When I heard the learn’d astronomer,
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me,
When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them,
When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick,
Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
And we can explore his thought a little further with the help of Psalm 104, which a teacher of mine for Literature once called “one of the masterpieces of world literature”. And the German philosopher Johann Gottfried Herder remarked, “It is worth studying the Hebrew language for ten years in order to read Psalm 104 in the original”. For the sake of the beauty of language, I use here the King James Version:
1 Bless the LORD, O my soul
O LORD my God, thou art very great;
thou art clothed with honor and majesty:
2 who coverest thyself with light as with a garment:who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:
3 who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters:who maketh the clouds his chariot:
who walketh upon the wings of the wind:
4 who maketh his angels spirits;his ministers a flaming fire: Heb. 1.7
5 who laid the foundations of the earth,that it should not be removed for ever.
6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment:the waters stood above the mountains.
7 At thy rebuke they fled;at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away.
8 They go up by the mountains;they go down by the valleys
unto the place which thou hast founded for them.
9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over;that they turn not again to cover the earth.
10 He sendeth the springs into the valleys,which run among the hills.
11 They give drink to every beast of the field:the wild asses quench their thirst.
12 By them shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation,which sing among the branches.
13 He watereth the hills from his chambers:the earth is satisfied with the fruit of thy works.
14 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle,and herb for the service of man:
that he may bring forth food out of the earth;
15 and wine that maketh glad the heart of man,and oil to make his face to shine,
and bread which strengtheneth man’s heart.
16 The trees of the LORD are full of sap;the cedars of Lebanon, which he hath planted;
17 where the birds make their nests:as for the stork, the fir trees are her house.
18 The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats;and the rocks for the conies.
19 He appointed the moon for seasons:the sun knoweth his going down.
20 Thou makest darkness, and it is night:wherein all the beasts of the forest do creep forth.
21 The young lions roar after their prey,and seek their meat from God.
22 The sun ariseth, they gather themselves together,and lay them down in their dens.
23 Man goeth forth unto his workand to his labor until the evening.
24 O LORD, how manifold are thy works!In wisdom hast thou made them all:
the earth is full of thy riches.
25 So is this great and wide sea,wherein are things creeping innumerable,
both small and great beasts.
26 There go the ships:there is that leviathan,
whom thou hast made to play therein.
27 These wait all upon thee;that thou mayest give them their meat in due season.
28 That thou givest them they gather:thou openest thine hand, they are filled with good.
29 Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled:thou takest away their breath, they die,
and return to their dust.
30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created:and thou renewest the face of the earth.
31 The glory of the LORD shall endure for ever:the LORD shall rejoice in his works.
32 He looketh on the earth, and it trembleth:he toucheth the hills, and they smoke.
33 I will sing unto the LORD as long as I live:I will sing praise to my God while I have my being.
34 My meditation of him shall be sweet:I will be glad in the LORD.
35 Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth,and let the wicked be no more.
Bless thou the LORD, O my soul.
Praise ye the LORD.
And I conclude with a composition by Rachmaninov (Rachmaninov Vespers op.37 II, Part II: Bless the Lord my soul / Psalm 104):






Thank you so much, Teresa, for a lovely greeting for Sunday morning – the art, the poetry, the psalm, and the utterly beautiful musical setting with the “raised arms” of all the buildings. What a combination of praise to God. Thank you again.
And thank you a lot dear Jacquelyn for your support.
.
The idea that “atheist scientists” might lose their particular sense of of “beauty and the transcendent” any more readily than say, a Catholic priest might – is utterly absurd, and would be offensive – if it were not so pitifully childish.
Thinks Toad.
Let’s see if they run this.
Surely the mind of a scientist who is an atheist is closed to what is transcendent? Is this not simply a fact of atheism, which does not see God as being the ultimate transcendent Creator and source of everything good – knowledge, science, beauty, music, art, poetry, language…?
There are scientists who are people of faith for whom this understanding of the Creator is at the root of their work. There are also those who are not, who certainly do have a sense of goodness and beauty of all kinds. But there are scientists who are atheists who pour scorn on the concept of the Creator, and do their best to undermine its presence in the lives of people around them. I think perhaps it was these latter that Teresa had in mind when she put together this post.
Yes Jacquelyn. I would put Albert Einstein into that second category you mention – one of those scientists “who certainly do have a sense of goodness and beauty of all kinds”. Fr. Benedict Groeschel (of whom I am a great fan) has often described Einstein as reaching out to the mystery of the transcendent in the wonder of Creation, without quite being able to make the jump from unbeliever to believer.
A blog writer called Matthew R. Crawford had this to say about the topic:
“Einstein’s concept of beauty is that it resonates with the God of the Christian faith. Einstein’s own journey of faith never led him to embrace Christianity. After a few brief teenage years as a devoutly practicing Jew, Einstein went on to hold a deistic concept of God. He stood in awe at the beauty and complexity of the cosmos, but could not bring himself to accept the idea of a God who meddles in human history. As Christians we must affirm that Einstein saw correctly that the beauty of the universe reflects the beauty of something or Someone beyond the universe. If God had remained silent, we could say no more than Einstein said – that the vast darkness of the universe presents suggestions of a transcendent beauty. However, the uniqueness of the Christian story is that it asserts that this God has not remained silent. He has spoken into the darkness and revealed his beauty in even more striking colors than can be found in mere mathematical equations. The beauty of God is seen most clearly in the Christian narrative of a God who did meddle in history by doing the most unimaginable thing – becoming a human and redeeming mankind. It is a disgrace that more Christians who have the gift of the word and Spirit do not stand in awe of the beauty of God as did Einstein who only saw through a glass darkly. May we say with David, “One thing have I asked of the Lord . . . to gaze upon the beauty of the Lord and to inquire in his temple” (Psalm 27:4).”
Thank you Jacquelyn, yes that is what exactly my meant, which is also meant to be a one-sentence summary of the poem by Whitmann.
@Kathleen, yes, Einstein and many other scientists who don’t claim to be “religious” (which is rather meant to be the institutionalized religion like Jewish Religion, Christianity, Islam etc), can be regarded as Pantheists, who do sense more than lifeless material and abstract physical laws.
Yes, Jacquelyn, thank you for explaining to us what Teresa meant.
Otherwise, we’d have no idea, and have to rely on what she wrote..
.
“Surely the mind of a scientist who is an atheist is closed to what is transcendent? Is this not simply a fact of atheism, which does not see God as being the ultimate transcendent Creator and source of everything good – knowledge, science, beauty, music, art, poetry, language…? “
Toad takes this to mean that no atheist (scientist or not) can have any sense of beauty, music, art, poetry, etc.
If he is mistaken, Teresa will no doubt be able to tell us what Jacquelyn means.
(We must surely allow even the loathsome atheist scientists knowlege of “knowlege,” “language” and at least “science”!)
This is exceptionally silly. Thinks Toad.
@Jacquelyn, forgive me my silence and you’ll certainly understand why (if someone seeks deliberately quarrel one should better avoid him). Thank you again a lot for your support and I hope we shall have a lot of fruitful exchanges further on our blog.
.
Well, Teresa, you can always get my comments quietly removed. As you have done recently. I can’t do the same with yours. Nor would want to. Dishonest.
You are mean Toad, the way you constantly criticise Teresa. You know she is not a native English speaker, yet she still manages to explain herself brilliantly, and to create some fascinating and informative posts, discussions and comments.
Bet you couldn’t even do a fraction as well as Teresa in her native language.
The removal of cat fight comments is a method to keep the thread readable. But now this thread is again ruined, as someone only wants to quarrel. Indeed I don’t know what to do with you, why can’t you stick to the topic and be less ad hominem. You don’t like me and you don’t have to, but please think of the others who come to read the thread.
If you can’t calm down it is necessary to remove again your comments as you are ruining the thread.
.
I don’t only want to quarrel. I want to discuss things sensibly and without prejudice. Yes, I do disagree with many of your views, that’s what a forum is all about.
But censoring me is not the right way to reply. Or so I think.
And I don’t think what you have done is right, or decent, or honest. That’s all.
And I’m surprised others have let you behave like this.
@Toad, no censor is not a good way, but if you keep writing how you dislike me it might be exciting for you and me and interesting for both of us but don’t you see how boring it is to the others?
And of course you can have your opinion about me and I don’t want to argue about it. I am only fed up with this catfight which keep going on and on. If you agree to give it up, we can start talking like grown ups. And no, your opinion won’t censored, just remember, don’t be too much ad hominem as it is boring to read.
Every blog has an editing guideline. Not everything should be published. Sometimes I censor also what I’ve written. Online quarrel is a most tiresome thing one should avoid, and some comments I’ve written in haste I do trash it to avoid further quarrel. I don’t want to quarrel and I want peace, online quarrel between total strangers is really a waste of time. Hope you will also see it like this. We don’t know each other and there is no need for these personal invectives, we are not husband and wife and I don’t like emotional dramas, I live a quiet and peaceful life and I don’t need online quarrels.
.
Kathleen, I’ve already reassured Teresa that her English is totally adquate, more than that, excellent. Vastly superior than of most of us on here.
Plenty good enough to put her point of view over loudly and clearly. It’s the point of view I have problems with, not the grammar.
And I have never been obscene or illogical or unreasonable. (at least I think not.) She talks of censoring me over a “cat fight”.
Well, would you? Or Raven? You never have.
What is a blog like this, if not a cat fight? A mutual admiration society?
.
Teresa, I do not dislike you. If we met, I suspect I might like you very much.
I don’t like your views on certain things, and so I say so. But that’s not disliking you.
It’s a bit like someone who likes God, but doesn’t care for the Catholic Church.
I suspect such people may well exist.
Well, Toad, I get constant impression that you hate me, I might be wrong but you do argue like “she doesn’t need a life”, “she …”, all these personal invectives and that to a total stranger you don’t know! That is strange and unnecessary. And I do sense a suppressed aggression from you directed at me under the guise of “humour”. And things like “she is whining again…”, and to be frank, are these words interesting? Do they have anything to do with the topic?
Really, that is the turning point when good blogs get ruined by this kind of nagging.
If you don’t like what I state, please do it in an argument which could be interesting to other readers, which you do quite often do, until I come and comment, and the nagging from you starts, then the thread becomes “Toad dislike Teresa” show. And that is really too much. For the sake of the blog, stop it.
Toad
Please leave it there.
We are a small team and we have considerable work commitments outside this blog. If you feel that we’ve fouled up in our moderation from time to time, then I apologise: subject to our time, there will not be any more “silent” deletions.
.
Teresa, one last post tonight. “Hating” you, or anyone else on earth, is not how I behave, or ever have.
I gently suggest once more that all I have ever attacked are your ideas. But then, when you would say things like, “I have better things to do, thanks, night, night,” and so on I have remarked sharply on it, I will admit. Probably should not have.
But, you are right. Time for Toad to show a little mercy.
Amen. Night, night.
Toad, please…..sorry to sound like a schoolmarm (that’s what I am, actually, a retired one anyway) but I don’t like it when people take me out of context and misread what I say.
My first sentence, “Surely the mind of a scientist who is an atheist…….” , was simply to explore the meaning of the words “atheist” and “transcendent”, so we would have a basis for what we are discussing. My dictionary says for “atheist”: “One who denies the existence of God”, and for “transcendent”: “Above and independent of the material universe. Said of the Deity”. That’s why I went on (second sentence) to say that atheists do not see God as being the Creator of what we are and what we can do/have/know/create/invent, etc.
However, in my second paragraph, second sentence, I spoke quite clearly about scientists who are not people of faith, but “who certainly do have a sense of goodness and beauty of all kinds” – and have all kinds of other knowledge and ability as well – and Kathleen picked up on this with a lengthy and very interesting tribute to Albert Einstein. I’m sure there are also many others who lack faith but, as she said, reach out to the transcendent without being able to make the jump from unbeliever to believer.
This is really much too interesting and worthwhile a topic to have arguments, especially hurtful ones.
.
Right Jacquelyn, back to the topic it is.. Another day, anouther doleur.
“To all atheist scientists who have lost their sense of beauty and the transcendent – Poetry can be a cure…”
…Was Teresa’s headline.
I thought it worth commenting on, as it struck me as being a teeny bit selective.
Why not, for example, say:
“To all Catholic bus conductors who have lost their sense of beauty and the transcendent – Poetry can be a cure..”
Or even…
“To all Lutheran window cleaners who have lost their sense of beauty and the transcendent – Making matchsticks out of burned-out cathedrals can be a cure..”
You see what I’m getting at?
No. Oh, well.
There’s also the possibility, that you have now raised, that horrid atheist scientists wouldn’t have any sense of the transcendent to lose in the first place.
But it was kindly of Teresa to show concern for the mental well-being of atheists, scientists particularly. She has a good heart.
But that’s enough on this one for Toad.
Duly chastened by all the godly, he retires to lick his wounds.
I used to be a “complete duffer at the arts” (as I was told at my interview for medical school), and all poetry was far beyond my understanding until really quite recently.
Most of it still is, but something changed within me when I discovered the writings of the Christian mystics, which I had sought out to understand my own conversion experience.
I would posit that good poetry is written from one of the many vantage points along the mountain road to Heaven. I always picture that road having many hairpin bends, with parking spots to enjoy the view from. The weather up there can be awful, but when it clears, it is breathtakingly clear.
Oh yes, the summit lies above the weather!