, 1874-02-15
EVOLUTION AND THEOLOGY.
Their Antagonism, und the
Causes Thereof.
Some Speculatiens as to Results Of tho
Evolutionary Hypothesis.
Christianity Pre-eminentIy an Evolution
al Religion.

tnfisIianity Pfe-eminentiy an Evolution
al Religion.
No Conflict Between Physical Facts and
! Moral Laws.
In the preparatory remarks to Prot. AgasBiz'e
Lectures On tho Method OF Creation. the follow
ing remarks occur: "Later, when Scieuce
was raised above contempt, she became the
object of dread almost as fatal to free develop
ment. Her boundaries we're prescribed by The
ology, and limited by the generally-accepted
creeds> Indeed, this phase OF persecution has
hardly yet passed away. remember we'll, when
. young man, being called before the Board OF
Education in Nonfchntel, the town where then
taught as Professor, to be reprimanded for ill.,
culcating 1ntide1 doctrines; aud this because
did not hesitate to speak Of Geology as reveal-
ing, approximately at least the age Of the world,
md showing 1t to be far older than Church-creed
had supposed. These arc unpleasant reco!lec-
] tions."
TINE HAS INDICATED rRoF. AGAss1z;
he lived to sec himself adopted BY Orthodox
| Theologiaus as il some sort their Scientific
champion and, now that he is dead, tho rslig-
ious press Of the entire country bastens to honor
his memory,-to praise his life aud works. Yet
| Agassiz abandoned mono OF his Scientific her
! estes, and, in the cou1ee Of his lifo ho taught
many things, besides that which called down
upon him the rcprimaud Of tho Nenfchatol
Board Of Educotion, t1ayerHing the generally
received traditions Of Orthodox Theology.
The odor of sanctity in which he seems to
have died may be ascribed in part to the growth
! OF q more liberal spirit among Theologians and
in part to his refusal, almost alone Of the emf
| nent Scientific men Of the day. to accept the
| theory Of Evolution as at this day developed
! for this now threatens to become Theological
bete noir beside which all others will be dHarfed
| into ineignlfcanco.
| It is true that late years. have seen = wonder
ful change in tho attitude OF Theologians to-
ward Scientific investigation. From bitter op-
position to any interpretation Of tho phenomena
OF the Universe at variance with tho accepted
Theological interpretations. and sometimes
determined persecution of the bold Investigator
who yonturcd to proclaim theory, or even =
fact controvoning Theological tradition, wo have
come to witness readiness to accept the results
OF Scientific inquiry, and
TO Ass1MILATE THEM
and this change has beou wrought within COM
paraGyelv few years. Science is sometimes
represented aa attackiDg the atrongholds Of
Theology, undermining them one by one, aud
forcing Theology to retreat within narrower aud
narrower bounds but this metaphor 1s o false
ouc. True, Theology once covered the whole
field of human knoHledge; but it was very
narrow field. a true metaphor would be to say
that the Scientists ara the little band Of sappers
and miners, loading the way OF human progress.
*t.- nr.1 frY~rr IfaSnr
hind, comes tho big Theological army. Evoiu-
tionary hypothesis eau hardly DO said to be cs-
tabliBled upon tiTm basis as yet; but already
the adsance-g guard Ut tho Theological army is
crai books hnye appeared bearing upon the re-
lation Of Revelation to Evolution, tho latest
attempts to revise dogmas, aud to bring them
into harmony with facts by stretching them upon
the procruatean bod Of Science.
Not alone for the sake Of tue Theologian il tho
death Of Prof Agassiz to be deeply dcplored.
The theory of Evolution has been fairly stated,
and ia not lacking in able defenders It is much
to DO desired, in the interests OF Truth, that it
should DO examined, std its weak points ex-
posed, by opponents aa able. Prof. Ag.ssizs
learning and candor above all, his familiarity
with tho results of archaeological rescarchcs-
pointed to Linn as Que peculiarly fitted to handle
the subject, and gige it an able and critical OK
animation. Now that he is dead, it is doubtful
if there is any one left to tako his piace. For
once, perhaps, Theology and Science may clasp
hands over one grave, and mourn common
loss.
It is idle to deny that IN
ANTAGONIST EXISTS DETwEES THE TWO.
Tho Scientific method is tho antipodes Of the
Theological The Theological method Of train
ing is eninently calculated to unfit its recipient
for the pursuit OF Truth In geuernl, it consists
in giving the student certain premises, which he
is told, in the language OF Dr.. Holland, are
''qucstions above reasou," tho ye1ifcation of
which it is, therefore. useless for him to Ut
tempt; he is risidly confined within certain pre-
scriucd limits during his course Of study, which
certain dogmas aud formulas which his particu-
lar sect has adopted M creed and withal he
acquires the habl: Of mind which leads him to
regard lis utterauccs as eI cdhtedra, however
paradoxicat they may be, because derived from
unquestionable authority. III brief, the Theolo-
gian looks backward for 1tuth,-the Scientist
looks forward.
And, although tho attempt, as before-men~
toned, has been made to 'reconcio thus latest
produc: OF Scientific Investigation with existing
Theological interpretations OF tue phenomena |
with which it deals, there isa
MANIFEST D1sTREST OF II,
on the part OF the great body Of IhcologianB, |
which the lapse Of tifno will most probably in |
meaning aud application Of the theory are nm
folded. Dr.. Dawson OF McGI1 University, de- |
c!a1cs that, carried to ts legitimate conclusions,
it il subyersiye of Thesm itself. although it is
difficult to see by what method OF reasoning be |
has arrived at such result; and there Gun bo
little doubt that the universal eulogics pro-
bounced upon Prof. Asassiz by the religious
press mark not so much their admiration OF his |
life and labors, as their approval Of his antago-
Dism to the O. 'transmutation theory" as LIE was |
fond of calling it.
What is there in the theory Of Evolution which
runs 80 counter to what Mr. Herbert Speu .er
terms the Theological bias
In the beginning OF the world. God made man,