Limits of Human Science, by F. Pieper (Part 1) (1901)

      This 4-part series follows the series reviewing Dr. Thomas Korcok's 2011 CPH book Lutheran Education, especially Part 2. where he faults Old Missouri for holding to the Bible and uses Hermann Sasse's judgment against them. This begs the question: how will the new planned Luther Classical College in Casper, Wyoming address this hot topic for today? We will touch on that later, but first we will be treated to perhaps the best counsel that any Christian school could get… since the days of C. F. W. Walther.  Dr. Korcok rightfully praises the Old Missourians, even if he later criticizes them. So, let's hear exactly what the principles were for them. The following address, delivered 110 years before Dr. Korcok's book appeared, was for a new building at Concordia College of Milwaukee, a campus now owned by the Forest County Potawatomi tribe. It would eventually move and become Concordia University Wisconsin. — From Lehre und Wehre, vol. 47 (Oct. 1901), pp. 289-295 [EN]: 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

On the Limits of Human Science.

(Address delivered at the dedication of the new academic building of Concordia College at Milwaukee, Wis.).

[by F. Pieper]

Honored Assembly.

We have just handed over a building which is to be used for secondary school instruction. Our institution is a church institution. But in spite of this, indeed precisely because it is a church institution, human knowledge or, what is the same thing, human science is to be cultivated in it.

You know that in wide circles there is an assumption of opposition between church and human science. Is this assumption correct? Are the Christian church and human science really opposites? Must he who is a faithful member of the Christian church fight human science? And must he who is a sincere and truth-loving researcher in the field of human knowledge declare a feud with the Christian Church? By all means not! The Christian Church is not an enemy of human science. The Christian church itself always uses worldly knowledge for the orientation of its calling in the world, and history proves that the more seriously the Christian church took the orientation of its calling in the world, the more zealously it cultivated all worldly knowledge. Likewise, human science is not in itself an enemy of the Christian church. This is already evident from the fact that thousands of the most renowned representatives of human science were and are faithful members of the Christian church. No! The Christian church and human science are not opposites.

But how is it that the Apostle Paul warns Christians against "philosophy" or human science? He writes to the Colossians (Colossians 2:8): “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, [page 290] after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” The Apostle here warns against human science inasmuch as it has become foolish. He warns here against human science insofar as it does not remain within its limits, insofar as, not recognizing its limits, it judges things of which it knows and understands nothing. 

Unfortunately, this kind of “science”, which does not know its limits, has not died out even in our time. But we want to remain unconfused with this kind of “science”, as in our other institutions, so also in this institution. We want to cultivate true science. We want to cultivate science that is clearly aware of the limits of its knowledge and actually keeps within these limits.

What are these limits? Let me now explain this in brief.

But before I point out the limits of human science, we must agree on what we mean by “human science”. The word “science” has become a catchword of our time. Thousands, indeed millions, carry this word around in their mouths without binding a certain concept with it. We understand by human science the summa of knowledge which men — setting aside the revelation of Holy Scriptures — have from themselves by way of observation, research and investigation. With this description of “science” we can count on general agreement, especially also on the agreement of those who reproach the church that it does not respect science enough. From this side it is asserted that the church does not want to accept what men have investigated and proved by observation and investigation to be the "incontrovertible results of science. What are the limits of this human science?

- - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 2  - - - - - - - - - - 

     The counsel that Pieper gives in this essay does nothing more than follow the spirit of Martin Luther who stated in a letter to Amsdorf concerning Erasmus's learning:

“For it is better that the sciences fall than religion, when the sciences do not serve but want to trample Christ under foot.” —  Martin Luther

Pieper referenced this essay in his Christian Dogmatics vol. 1, pp. 317-318. — In the next Part 2…

- - - - - - - -  Table of Contents  - - - - - - - - 

Part 1: This Introduction, opening section of Pieper's address

Part 2: Theology first, before science; Law and Gospel

Part 3: Conjecture, hypothesis, speculation = end of science

Part 4: Hostility to Christ dominates civilized world, also textbooks in schools

Part 5: Luther Classical & Valpo compared: Accreditation for Lutheran schools

Appendix: Limits6a: Pieper to Bronxville: "unique knowledge" – don’t forget it (1909)

  Limits6b: Athenians, the “progressives”, the “ignoramuses”; Paul's address

  Limits6c: “What good is all knowledge if…”

  Limits6d: “pretense of modern science”