Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1884-09-02
SCIENTISTS IN THE PULPIT.
RELIGIOUS TOPICS DISCUSSED.
Several OF the Montreal Paip'ts Fiiiea ~
scientific slen-Dr. Dolisnser speaks on
Science and Faith.

A Montreal special TO the New York
J;mss. dated sunday, SAYS Early to-day
the different excursion parties OF the British
Association came burrying back 10 this
CITY. Quite number, however, OF those
who went away will not be back before
,be oneninr al the sessions tomorrow
morning. Sermons were preached In
many al the churches of this city to-day
containing aliusiops 10 the visit OF the
British scientists, and among the preachers
were several members ~ the association.
AT the English Cathedral. otherwise snd
more correctly known as CHRIST churcn
Cathedral, the Rev. DR.. w. Campion. OF
Queens College, Cambridge. delivered an
elooucnt address 10 very large congrega.
,ion. from The text, "Who Is this klngT
He said he had not been DISTURBED IN his
faith Inv the advances Of science, Tor get back
as far as science could. there was SIN the
beoInnine, where God remained. Man,
pbysjcally. might he traced TO the ape, but
stiil,pe soul was from God. At the Church
nj ~. James the Apostle the Rev. L. p.
Enubley. the rector Of Stayecy, Leeds.
preached 10 The morning: the Rev. W. +.
iaSobe Bateman, oi ~. John the ESangc-
list, Norwood, London, in the afternoon,
and the Rev. Harry Jones, pre0endarv
The Rev. Silas Il. Hooking, of Southport.
rreached no the Ottawa-Street Methodist
church, and the Rev. Edwin Hill, OF st.
Johns College, Cambridge, discoursed at
~. Georges church. A devotional meet
ing OF the British Association was held in
The David Morrlch Hall in the afternoon.
Perhaps the most characteristic discourse
of the day was hy the Rev. w. II. Dolling-
or, Ii. d., +. II. s., Of Sheffield. in the
WesIcyan College building OF McGill Uni
versity. IL was a lecture on the relations
OF science and faith, and was listened to by
n large audience. The reverend gentleman
is Of middle age and OF average height, with
sironely.maIked features and face which
is frnged with slight frameworS OF
whiskers extending under the chin. He
has high. broad forehead and dark brown
hair and eyes. bespoke in a conversational
tone, rarely elevating the voice, and used
gestures sparingly, though effectively. His
object, lac said, was TO present a discourse
which should be strictly academi0 The
disclosures OF science had brought some
suggestions which filed some minds with
doubts. lie would endeavor 10 consider
Christ as divine manifestation in the light
OF the most recent scientific knowledge.
He read number Of extracts from the
Gospel OF st. John, not TO use them as
texts, but as indicCs for the main line OF
thought he intended 10 pursue. and 10 dis
cuss the ailInatiOns which they suggested.
He wished to approach great moral
question IN the same way as he would
matter Of natural science - nearly AZ
the nature OF the subject would per-
nit. The methods OF science had no
application to the subject, but the spirit OF
scientific research had. Christianity had
been the sdyent Of "A new moral mower, and
Christ was miracle. History is at loss
TO explain His power. His character. HIS
career, and His death. We know that
many truth-loving men say that any mirac-
ulous interference with the course OF ma
ture is Inconceivable-nay impossible.
This merely means that miracle does
not happen as far rs we know. What we
see are sequences OF natural Jaws. An
INTERRUPTION OF those laws cannot be thought
OF. Note, however. how much OF nature
and OF natural law there is which we do
not know. This is ncgation, but we have
seen enough Of the power OF negation to
teach us modesty. Granted once that 1t
was a personal God who produced nature,
is il supposed that He did 30 ordan things
to be beyond His power: Did he, by the
act Of creation. give up His power and be-
come mere slave amid the phenomena He
produced?
The momentous question meets us at the
outset, Is there a God? Ii cannot be that
nature, which requires mind 10 interpret
and perceive ite beauties. did not require
mind 10 produce il. III mind alone can
perceive the beauty and order OF earth and
the heavens could It be less than mind
which ordained and established themi The
speaker took up the evolution theory as ad-
yanced by Herbert Spencer. In this there
must be beginning. Mr.. Spencer is COM
PEELED 10 start with beginning when
the homogeneous became heterogene-
Gus. But the homogeneous, according
TO the theory. Was everything; that
there was nothing outside OF it 20
affect ii. Yet. somehow, the perfectly
homogeneous Is unstable. It's equilibrium
breaks, and there is beginning OF pro-
gress, which passes through inanimate
matter to life and reaches its fruition in
man. Now, matter and force are not in
separable. Force is not necessary attri-
butte or property OF matter, bat an affection
OF 1t. There must be something outside Of
il TO influence it. The materiaiistic is
something unthinkable. God, rs the great
mental cause, Is the only solution OF the
problem. The question of who caused God
is the prinus among paradoxcs. Every
finite phenomenon must have cause.
But we cannot deduce this OF the In
finite. upon which We cannon experiment
or know Of. The origin OF matter We can
never know. We cannot conceive it 10
have existed eteTnally or conceive how in
finite power brought it into being. All
matter resolves itself down TO ultimate
,fn Il At na
possessed Of .heir different properties I
Was 1t accident, or were the properties
impaired by competent mind? The prop
critics Of matter could not be normally ac-
Quired. There is no atomic evolution.
Atoms do not change or acquire new
properties. ii they were without perml-
ncnce matter would be unstable, and in
stead OF cosmos, time would have reigned
over chaos. Atoms were made and en-
dOWed in the beginning with all their prop
critics by the Creator. The impulse OF the
beginning was from God. This interpO.
SitiOn was a miracle. Divine action from
without was necessary TO construct the
atom before evolution was possible. But
were these atoms 80 endowed competent to
form themselves into living beings and INTO
man? The results OF scientific research
give the answer "NO." Other factors ale
wanting. Life is not the function OF any
atoms or the property OF any combination
OF atoms ss such. Life is a new factor in
the universe. Nothing can change what is
not living into the living. How did inor-
ganic matter become converted TO life ?
BY the action OF God. Here, then, is the
second interposition, interruption, or
miracle. Having obtained one or more
forms OF primordal life the development
OF these ~ conceivable. But no develop
ment could end in man "a he is.
Man is conscious, and this consciousness
is not property even OF living matter. No
action Of molecules accounts for this. Does
water think or feel a. il turns into frost on
the window-pane, The problem OF the
connection between mind and matter, be-
tween body and soul. is as inconeeivable in
It's modern Is 1t was IN its ancient forms.
Mental phenomena transcend the proper
ties OF matter, and cannot be formulated on
any laws OF matter and force. Man is also
a moral being, having perceptions Of right
and wrong. Can any one believe this TO re-
suit from atomic interactions or molecular
combinations! Ii had TO be made by the
mystery OF anew potency. Thi: further
interruption OF natures laws was another
miracle. II Is best expressed bv the state
ment: "And God breathsd into his nostrils
and he became q living SOUL" Now, grant
Ing that evolution has been the means by
which God has created, there have been
direct and palpsble Interruptions, interpo-
sitiOns, miracles, by power higher than
nature Having rcached this point WHY not