The Press. — London, England, 1856-06-14 00:00:00

p. ap►. phy ments must always be viewed in connection with the circumstances under which they were made, and must receive sometimes the wide, and sometimes the figurative, interpretation demanded by their spirit and intent. But if the physicist is not to be bound by the letter of revelation, neither surely is the divine to be chained by the facts of science. While each pursues his legitimate way, there need be no fear that they will come into collision. We must not, indeed, expect that parallelism between their ideas required by some servile minds; but we may expect that, viewed from an elevation, there will be such a general harmony between their conclusions as hath been demonstrated to exist between the moral government of the world, as observed in nature, and the divine government of the world, as ex hibited in revelation. We fear we must accuse the physicists of having shown most bigotry in the geological controversies. They have not always been content with their proper domain. They have not been content to wait for that agree ment which time is tolerably sure to produce when science and Scripture are brought toge ther. They have insisted on testing Scripture by the facts of geology ; and because the literal correspondence is not exact, they have most imprudently and most. audaciously, not only jumped to a conclusion within themselves that the Mosaic record is totally destitute of authority, but have not hesitated to publicly stigmatise it as absurd. In reviewing several months back Professor Powell's " Unity of Worlds" (Pam% vol. iii., p. 356), we called attention to language used by him which seemed to us indecorous and uncalled for. He insisted that there was a " palpable contradiction " between the facts of geology and the record of the Bible ; and advocated what is called the development theory, as opposed to the Scriptural account of the creation of man by a direct act of Almighty will. It becomes, therefore, a duty on the part of competent investigators to show that such " palpable contradiction " does not exist, and to indicate such general principles of agree ment between the cosmogony of the Bible and the cosmogony of Nature, as the candid in quirer would expect to find on the supposition that the former was a divine revelation. It is this useful work which Mr. Nl`Causland has attempted to perform; and though his book is but a small one, and it is less careful and cautious than could be wished, yet we are sure that he has proceeded on a right principle, and that he has, as regards geology, marked out those broad lines of agreement between science and Scripture which the enlightened and truly reverent Christian would most desire to see established. Tracing, in the first instance, the natural history of the globe, as gathered from geologi cal facts, he proceeds to show how it was in the beginning " without form or void;" how the moving of the spirit of God upon the waters may well be intended to convey the first impregnation of inorganic matter with vitality ; and how the several acts of creation recorded in Genesis are perfectly reconcileable with the epochs of the world's development disclosed by geology. On the meaning of the word " day " he argues that the term meant in Hebrew a period of time, as well as a natural day, and he quotes some instances of such application : In the Book of Job the period of man's life is termed " his day." In other parts of Scripture we have similar expressions, such as " the day of God's wrath ;" the day of the Lord. . . . . Again, the Prophet Daniel describes as " the vision of the evening and morning " a period previously described to him as comprising " two thousand and three hundred days." The suggestion following appears to us singu larly ingenious, and, as far as we know, is per fectly original : There is another view of this question which may tend to elucidate the meaning and import of the Mosaic lan. gunge. The history of the Creation was conveyed to Moses either by direct inspiration, or, like the generality of diving communications, through the medium of a vision or series tions of years are often compressed in a dream into the space of a few minutes, or even a less space of time ; on the same principle, the operations of the Divine Author of the Creation, which may have occupied a long series of years, may have been presented to Moses as the events of a single day. We know nothing of the scientific acquire ments of Mr. M'Causland. We can only say that he appears to possess strong common sense, and that his work is in the right track to be pursued by those who would endeavour to harmonise the truths of Scripture with the facts of science. One question which the author has scarcely touched upon would, we are well persuaded, reward diligent inquiry. It is in the nearness of God to man that the essence, the strength, and the vitality of religion consist. Without this conviction, faith is ideality, and worship is formalism. The discoveries in the vast sphere of Cosmos have a tendency to weaken this belief, and to remove God far from us. It is by examining the earth itself, by attending to the facts which God has given us for our guidance, and as one mean of raising our minds to him by the aid of physical sense, that we must hope. in part at least, to correct this tendency. The science which is our bane must be our antidote. We must wrestle with its mysteries till, yielding to our tens• city, they resolve themselves into shape, and stand in visible presence before us. Geology has discovered to us many secrets of the earth. It speaks to us of the world in embryo, but it is silent, absolutely and wholly silent, on that most eventful passage in crea tion when nature was truly animated and glorified by the calling into being of man. What is it to us, in comparison with this sublime act of creative skill, which gave to the world significance, and to animal life intel ligence and soul, that the earth was, in 'periods too remote te be measured by human com putation, totally different in constitution from what it is now? In our estimate of matter, how gross an error would it be to overlook the immeasurable superiority of mind. Not de spising the fossil-writing which records the existence of Saurian birds and reptiles, those strange monsters of the ante-human world, let us reserve the grandest efforts of our industry to know something of the birth of man. Some kind of physical evidence there must be as to the duration of man's exist ence on the earth. What is that evidence worth ? What is its extent, and what its We know that he is comparatively of mo dern date. Geologists will unanimously say that, in comparison with the age which this volume of the earth has inscribed in its outer leaves, he is a being of yesterday Their assu rance so far is satisfactory, but it does not go far enough. In matters which so nearly concern us, we never can have too much evidence. " More " light, more light." This is the natural crav ing of man, and will be till the desire is lost in the full effulgence of the rays which are denied to his spirit while walled in by the flesh. We can imagine that the evidence as to the existence of man on the earth may be resolva ble into,- 1. The geological facts as to successive species of animal life. Such evidence may be extremely vague. Only conjecture may perhaps be allowable on the most ancient human remains discovered; but the conjec ture of skilful minds will be of some value. 2. The physical facts concerning human configuration, and how far, if at all, it has been modified by the time to which record extends. 3. The facts of antiquity, as visible in the oldest monuments and remains now existing on the earth of human workmanship. 4. The facts of history, inclusive of all kinds of inscriptions, of tradition, and of trustworthy record. 5. The inferences to be drawn from the pro gress made by man within those periods of preten, Lta for tl.e inquiry which curious and reverent minds would gladly see instigated. Not until the whole subject is scientifically and compe tently discussed shall wo get rid of that vagueness as to the direct creative operation of Deity in calling man into being which has been in all time a powerful ally of infide lity, and has proved a stumbling-block for weak minds. For our own part we would rather look upon Deity as a Divine architect, as acting with positive manipulative skill, than refine away his personal part in human crea tion by supposing that man was produced as a single incident in the drama of Creation, originating in atomic organisation too minute for observation. The presumptive evidence that the life of man on earth does not exceed the data as signed to it by the Scriptural record, seems as cogent as could be expected. It is an ob servation of Bossuet that in the patriarchal life which appears to us in ancient his. tory, conjoined as it was with the highest intellectual faculties, we can view the fresh ness and newness of human existence. We can observe the rapid, though not uniform, social progress made by man during the last three thousand years ; and being then as highly endowed as he is now, can we conceive it possible that his social state would not have been more advanced than it was. had his life on the earth been much longer than the period commonly assigned to it? The facts of geology disclose a time when man did not exist on the earth. How then was he produced? Could his birth have been less than a miracle ? Must he not at first have been an object of paternal care? To what extent inquiry may elucidate a subject so deeply interesting is beyond conjecture, but we feel satisfied that each gleam of light it casts upon our origin will tend to dissipate that abstraction of an infidel philosophy,—the development theory,—and show us God in the Personality so dear to human needs and as pirations of a Maker and a Father. Shakspere's England. • By G. W. Thornbury. London : Longmans. EVERY reader of these volumes must he struck with the industry they display, and the immense amount of information they embody. By the collection from innumerable sources of every available particular concerning the England of Shakspere's days, and by most ingeniously combining them together in kind of Mosaic tableaux, Mr. Thornbury restores, as far as such sketches can, the forms of life, the habitudes, the modes of thought, the amusements, the occupa tions, the classes, and the interiors of the close of the sixteenth century. For better effect, much of the de scriptive narrative is thrown into the present tense, so that we have well-known historical personages moving, acting, and speaking initheir habits as they lived. The author does not often refer to his authorities, nor is this necessary, as historical correctness is not pretended to ; but, as far as we can judge, nothing is set down without due warrant. The volumes are not of a kind to be read through at once. They are too full of matter to be hastily digested. But they are amusing throughout, and their multitudinous details are conveniently divided into chapters, so that reference is easy. In so brief a notice we can only give the impression the work has made upon us, but that impression is eminently favorable to the author's skill and diligence, and induces us to think that " Shakspere's England," in its chief social phases, has been faithfully brought before us. A Glimpse of the Wonders of Creation. By Leonora C. Prince. London : Hatchard. A PIOUS attempt to make the "Wonders of Creation " and biblical record throw light on each other. The authoress follows, in order, the Mosaic account of the Creation, and endeavours to establish in all instances the literal accuracy of what is written, as for example in the description of the serpent : Henry: What do serpents generally feed on ? Mrs. B.: They eat flesh, birds, frogs, fish, fruits, grass, &c. &e. But as they continually creep upon the earth, it is impossible but that their food must often be defiled with dust and dirt; some of them may really eat earth out of necessity, or at least earthworms, which they cannot swallow without a great deal of dirt with them. Part of the curse which God pronounced on the serpent was, that p IP P III.Illmilliuml "" mll "" limli " Ill " ullumllmill.IIII. """ ull.III. " IIII.IIIIII.IIIIIII " 1 " limillsl " limullIll. "Mll. 570 THE PRESS. SATURDAY , ________ in drawing inferences from them, has properly of visions; and comparing the expression " then evening time which are lit up by unquestionable and no more connection with Scripture, or need to was, then morning was, one day," with the somewhat authentic record. It is not pretended that all the el ements on interfere with it, than the electrical experi- similar expression in the Book of Daniel, " the vision of the evening and the morning," we cannot but see that there menter who draws lightning from the clouds. is strong ground for the suggestion that the whole scene which reasoning as to the age of man ' s b e i ng The Bible is primarily not a physical but a was conveyed to the sacred historian in a succession of can be founded are here set down ; it is only spiritual revelation, and its physical state- visions lt is well known that the transac• pretended to furnish some loose data for act meats must always be viewed in connection lions of years are often compressed in a dream into the inquiry which curious and revere n t minds l I II