The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-02-03
A.. woprnx SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT"
.,rofexxor stokes ON Darwfnism-T
Harmony of Science anu
Revelation.

A, the last meeting OF the Victoria 1 III
,osonbical Institute OF London, DR.. Stokes,
n : Secretary and Fellow OF the Royal
society. and Professor Of Mathematics at
Comhr,dce University, read paper whici,
or,onatinc from so distinguished a source,
has a particular value as chanpionlng the
cause Of Revelation against "moacrn
scientific thought" but encouraging pure
sciencn In this paper DR.. Stokes, as
sc;en,itc man, boldly repudiated INC idea
sometimes given expression 10 thaI the
,Synoo.css Of science would disprove the
ip"o,h ~ revelation, adding that the pro-
80 81 science constantly showed the re-
ss,srse IN he the case. The Book OF Rcve-
,o,iion and the Book Of Nature. rightly un-
derstood, had never yet clashed. Truth
,yas only i'm danger from want OF know
lo1ge: we often had evidence OF that, and
The progrcss Of accurate scientific research
and it, full encouragement were there
tore ~ the greatest value. He then pro-
ceedch 10 review the hypothesis OF Darwin.
remarking "there NAV, | will not say
mus, DE nothing atheistic in the belief that
oreat numbers of species were evolved
nn6rr The operation Of laws known or con-
cciyable from some preceding condition Of
4, SIMMER character; in case" he added,
Win marked emphasis, "we should find
reasonable scientific evidence in fayorof an
aairmativc answer; but the entire tenor
- liz paper went TO demonstrate that such
evidence was not at present forthcoming.
after reviewing MIR. DaTwin's theory OF
:. sncestrsl derivation and the survival OF
The f;,te-i. - which he said a. from its nature
can hardly, il at all. be made a subject OF
governmental investigation, or even OF Oh
.cryation in the records OF the past and
therefore must crest mainly on the cSti-
mate which NAV be formed Of lis own pro-
habilitv." Prof. Stokes. referring TO the
question OF the creation of man, continued:
=. I'm the account Of the creation II is dis
tluctly stated that man was separately ere
ated in the image OF God whatever that
may imply. Nor IL this point in which,
bv wide license OF Interpretation, we
might say The language was merely hguIa-
tive: that we can afford TO understand 1t
80. for that Scripture was not given us TO
teach us science. our whole ideas respect
inc tho nature Of SIN and the character OF
God are, AZ seems to me, profoundly affect
ed according rs we take the statement OF
Scripture striightfOrwardiy, which implies
man was created with special powers and
priyilegce. and IN state ofinn0cence from
which he fell, or II we suppose that man
came 10 be what he is by degrees. by vast
number Of infinitesimal variations from
some lower animal, accompanied by cor
re.uondipgly continuous variation III his
mental and moral condition. On this latter
Supposibon God was made TO be response
bic for his present moral condition, which
il but the natural OutgrOwth OF the
mode Of his creation. As regards the
lower animals. little change would
apparentlv he made from theological
point Of view. if We were to interpret rs
fglratiye the language which seems to as
sert succession Of creative acts. But the
creation Of man and bis condition at crea-
ton are not confined 10 the account given
I'm Genesis. They are dwelt on at length,
in connexion with the scheme OF redemT-
ton by 81. Paul, and are more briefly re-
ferred 10 by our LOrdhimself in cOnneNion
with the institution Of marriage"
A. against these statements, $50 express,
30 closely bound up with mans highest as-
pirations," we have nothing more to adj
ducc on the side OF science, says Professor
Stokes, Ethan a hypothesis OF continuous
transmutation incapable OF experimental
investigation, and making such demands
upon our Imagination as TO stagger at last
the initiated.'
A modified theory of Darwinism, rs ap-
piled 10 the creation OF man, was thus dealt
with:
"Some have endeavOred 10 combine the
statements Of Scripture with modified
hypothesis OF continuous transmutation by
supposing that at certain epoch in the
worlds history mental aud moral powers
were conferred by divine interpoSitiOn on
some animal that had been gradually mOdi-
fed in is bodily structure by natural
causes till it took the form OF man. As
special interpositiOn and special crea-
tion are here recognized, do not
see that religion has anything to
lose by the adoption Of this hypothesis,
but neither do ! see that science has any
thing to gain. Once admit special divine
intelTosiiion, and science has come to the
end Of her tether. Those who find the
idea helpful can adopt it; but for my own
part this combination OF the natural and
the supernatural seems somewhat gro
tesque, and | prefer resting in the state
-