Page:EB1911 - Volume 01.djvu/418

 of physical science, immersed as its students are apt to be in problems dealing with tangible facts in the world of experience, that there is a tendency among them to claim a superior status of objective reality and finality for the laws to which their data are found to conform. But these generalizations are not ultimate truths, when we have to consider the nature of experience itself. “Because reference to the Deity will not serve for a physical explanation in physics, or a chemical explanation in chemistry, it does not therefore follow,” as Professor Ward says (op. cit. vol. i. p. 24), “that the sum total of scientific knowledge is equally intelligible whether we accept the theistic hypothesis or not. It is true that every item of scientific knowledge is concerned with some definite relation of definite phenomena, and with nothing else; but, for all that, the systematic organization of such items may quite well yield further knowledge, which transcends the special relations of definite phenomena.”

At the opening of the era of modern scientific discovery, with all its fruitful new generalizations, the still more highly generalized laws of epistemology and of the spiritual constitution of man might well baffle the physicist and lead his intellect to “flounder.” It is fundamentally necessary, in order to avoid such floundering, that the “knowledge” of things sensible should be kept distinct from the “knowledge” of things spiritual; yet in practice they are constantly confused. When the physicist limits the term “knowledge” to the conclusions from physical apprehensions, his refusal to extend it to conclusions from moral and spiritual apprehensions is merely the consequence of an illegitimate definition. He relies on the validity of his perceptions of physical facts; but the saint and the theologian are no less entitled to rely on the validity of their moral and spiritual experiences. In each case the data rest on an ultimate basis, undemonstrable, indeed, to any one who denies them (even if he be called mad for doing so), except by the continuous process of working out their own proofs, and showing their consistency with, or necessity in, the scheme of things terrestrial on the one hand, or the mind and happiness of man on the other. The tests in each case differ; and it is as irrelevant for the theologian to dispute the “knowledge” of the physicist, by arguments from faith and religion, as it is for the physicist to deny the “knowledge” of the theologian from the point of view of one who ignores the possibility of spiritual apprehension altogether. On the ground of secular history and secular evidence both might reasonably meet, as regards the facts, though not perhaps as to their interpretation; but the reason why they ultimately differ is to be found simply in the difference of their mental attitude towards the nature of “knowledge”—itself a difference of opinion as to the nature of man.

AGNUS DEI, the figure of a lamb bearing a cross, symbolical of the Saviour as the “Lamb of God.” The device is common in ecclesiastical art, but the name is especially given in the Church of Rome to a small cake made of the wax of the Easter candles and impressed with this figure. Since the 9th century it has been customary for the popes to bless these cakes, and distribute them on the Sunday after Easter among the faithful, by whom they are highly prized as having the power to avert evil. In modern times the distribution has been limited to persons of distinction, and is made by the pope on his accession and every seven years thereafter.

Agnus Dei is also the popular name for the anthem beginning with these words, which is said to have been introduced into the missal by Pope Sergius I. (687–701). Based upon John i. 29, the Latin form is Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. In the celebration of the mass it is repeated three times before the communion, and it is also appended to many of the litanies. By the judgment in the case of “Read and others v. The Bishop of Lincoln” it was decided in 1890 that the singing of the Agnus Dei in English by the choir during the administration of the Holy Communion, provided that the reception of the elements be not delayed till its conclusion, is not illegal in the Church of England.

AGOBARD (c. 779–840), Carolingian prelate and reformer, became coadjutor to Leidrad, archbishop of Lyons, in 813, and on the death of the latter succeeded him in the see (816). We know nothing of his early life nor of his descent. He pursued the same vigorous policy as his predecessor, who had been one of Charlemagne’s most active agents in the reformation of the Church. He was strongly opposed to the schemes of the empress Judith for a redivision of the empire in favour of her son Charles the Bald, Which he regarded as the cause of all the subsequent evils, and supported Lothair and Pippin against their father the emperor Louis I. Deposed in 835 by the council of Thionville, he made his peace with the emperor and was reinstated in 837. Agobard occupies an important place in the Carolingian renaissance. He wrote extensively not only theological works but also political pamphlets and dissertations directed against popular superstitions. These last works are unique in the literature of the time. He denounced the trial by ordeal of fire and water, the belief in witchcraft, and the ascription of tempests to magic, maintained the Carolingian opposition to image-worship, but carried his logic farther and opposed the adoration of the saints. The basis for this crusade was theological, not scientific; but it reveals a clear intellect and independent judgment In his purely theological works Agobard was strictly orthodox, except that he denied the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures. Agobard was reverenced as a saint in Lyons, and although his canonization is disputed his life is given by the Bollandists, Acta Sanctorum, Jun. ii. 748.

AGONALIA, in ancient Rome, festivals celebrated on the 9th of January, 17th of March, 21st of May, and 11th of December in each year in honour of various divinities (Ovid, Fasti, i. 319-332). The word is derived either from agonia, “a victim,” or from agonium, “a festival.”

AGONIC LINES (from Gr. -, privative, and , an angle), the term given to the imaginary lines on the earth’s surface connecting points at which the magnetic needle points to the geographical north and south. (See .)

AGONOTHETES, in ancient Greece, the president or superintendent of the sacred games. At first the person who instituted the games and defrayed the expenses was the Agonothetes; but in the great public games, such as the Olympic and Pythian, these presidents were the representatives of different states, or were chosen from the people in whose country the games were celebrated; thus at the Panathenaic festival at Athens ten athlothetae were elected for four years to superintend the various contests. They were variously called ,  ,  ,  ,  (at Athens),  or  (from the rod or sceptre emblematic of their authority), but their functions were generally the same.

AGORA, originally, in primitive times, the assembly of the Greek people, convoked by the king or one of his nobles. The right of speech and vote was restricted to the nobles, the people being permitted to express their opinion only by signs of applause or disapproval. The word then came to be used for the place where assemblies were held, and thus from its convenience as a meeting-place the agora became in most of the cities of Greece the general resort for public and especially commercial intercourse, corresponding in general with the Roman forum. At Athens, with the increase of commerce and political interest, it was found advisable to call public meetings at the Pnyx or the temple of Dionysus; but the important assemblies, such as meetings for ostracism, were held in the agora. In the best days of Greece the agora was the place where nearly all public traffic