The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1883-09-06

of religion were SO interviewer
with the poetical destinations
attaching to doctrine. Can it be pos
sible that the Christian religion, or at
least the Protestant portion of it,
needs more of poetry in its formation
and existence? Is it too realistic
The doctrines and usages of Cathol-
icism would make it appear so. Is a
special Christian cosmogony neceS-
sary, and are mythical features
lacking to make it alluring
Is humanity led more by the
fancies and pleasurable forms of re-
ligions than by the dread of things
direful in the hereafter? Are these
things so. or is it probable that the
advanced ideas and the PHILOSOPHERS
of the day do not encourage blind be-
lief? Are the MohammedanS united
in religious belief, because ignorance
pervades a moral existence? Are the
Brahmins all strict religionists, be-
cause the lights Of science have not
yet penetrated Brahministic realms :?
Are Buddhists blind believers, because
the social and moral and physical doc
trines of three thousand years remain
unchanged among the Asiatics !?
There is wild poetry in the belief of
the aboriginal tribes of America.
These primitive tribes all believed i'm
plicitly in those doctrines that lead to
the happy hunting grounds of eter-
nifty, and their lives were made equal
to the requirements leading thereto.
Wherever science has advanced, Wher-
ever its relations have been applied
to the conditions Of nature, there
have antogonisms to orthodox doc
trines been created. Evolution has
been the outgrowth of scientific re-
search. Before it fall the poetical and
NEUROLOGICAL features of the ancient
cosmogonies. 1t is modern product,
based upon superior philosophy,
brought about by the wonderful ply
losophyical researches and appliances
Of the age. Some of the ancient ply
losophers dreamed, as it were,
of evolution, but their ideas
were necessarily vague. Pythagorus
promulgated doctrine involving cos
mic evolution. So did AnaXagoras
and some of the Sophists, while PATIO
scoffed at the very idea. Aristotle,
while deciple of Plato, had visions
of evolution, and the Stoics believed
in cosmogony that developed all
things out of one original being. The
origin of cosmos, the production
of organic matter and if conscious be-
ings, the meaning Of the observable
grades of creation. have, from the
dawn of speculative philosophy, alb
sorbed the attention of philosophers.
All modern investigation, under the
most favorable discoveries and ap-
planes, lead to the truth of evolu-
ton. 1t is demonstrated in all germ
life, and it must be recognized by the
doctrinarians, that harmonies be-
tween religion and science may
ensue. One must yield to the other,
or the one must struggle on with dan
gerous barriers before it. The great
moral precepts of the Bible must live,
but its cosmic theories must be aban-
doned. They are full of beauty, but
evolution is far more beautiful. and
every development in nature goes
to- prove its truth. The tradi-
lions of creation, that have crept into
all religious belief, spring from a
NEUROLOGICAL source. No one objects
to them in this relation. but they are
against the plainest records OF the
ages as pictured in the deep researches
of science. Cosmogonies should not
be attached to beliefs. They mar
their effect and the moralities, not
the imaginative features of religious
doctrines should be preserved, Science
presents undeniable truths, and re-
ligion must yield to the plain records
of the everlasting ages.