The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-01-11
sEcTAR1ANIsM AND EVOLUTION.

N0 aV "
In the january number of the American
Naturalist the editors discuss the attitude of the
Presbyterian and the Congregational churches,
respectively, toward the modern doctrine of
the evolution Of species, as follows:
'The Presbyterian denomination, from the
nature of it's theology, is more disposed to
critical and exact study than some of the
other bodies Of Christians. The relations
of evolution of species and Of the mental
phenomena different species display, to the
prevalent theologies, are obvious. The dis
cussion of these questions by Presbyterian
ministers naturally produces a widespread
agitation than in the case of Congregational
lists, on account Of the difference between the
two churches in their system of organization,
/ which does not give that independence to the
congregation in the former that is possible in
the latter"
The editors cite the fact that Mr.. Beecher's
advocacy Of the evolution of man and it's log
ical consequences has not affected his standing
in his church, while DR.. Woodrow, of the
Presbyterian Theological School of Charleston,
S. c., has been investigated by three %ecclesi-
astical bodies, and has been dismissed from his
chair; while later, DIR. Kellog, Of Pittsburg,
has been the object Of disciplinary proceed
ings by his board Of directors, for teaching
that the origin of mans body by evolution
may be true. The comment closes by saying
that the loss of scientific men is a serious loss
for any church, and inquiries, in view of the
evident desire of Christians of all sects to
know and teach the truth, ''would not the
policy which has retained Drs. LeConte and
McCosh in the Christian church be most con-
ducive to its future prosperity"
There is no doubt in the mind of any rea-
sonable man, whether preacher or layman,
but that it is the proper, judicious and Chris
tian thing for church and theological school
boards to allow their teachers, preachers
and members the largest proper liberty re-
garding both scientific and theological dogmas.
In this day knowledge is abroad in the land,
| and renders compulsory a finer Interpretation
Of nature, Of human history and of the daily
experience of life. The church or school
board which prosecute it's members or teach
ers because of the interpl citation they put
upon modern biological discoveries and theo-
ries, should remember that the church has
adapted itself and thameaning of its Scriptures
to a new cosmogony and geology, and with
out injury or rupture, and that the majority
of church members are intelligent in modern
science, and are literally disposed toward it.
The world is now receptive-willing to be
taught and led in all reasonable belief and
knowledge to. a degree unknown a century
ago. Materialsts and positivists of the gross
Clevenger and H@ckel type are but few, and
these are overmastered by the ever-recurring
questions: What lies beyondf What went
beforef Even these pronounced machinists
clothe themselves in theories Of the ssunknow-
able and the Supernatural, /" for these ideas
cannot be escaped, and, indeed, form the basis
of religion in every age and race, and in every
stage of individual and of racial growth.
As to evolution, the simple fact is that nine
tenths of its intelligent apostles and advocates
have been men of pronounced Christian faith
and character. There is no conflict between
religion and science. They present only two
concepts of the same thing-God revealed in
and to man, and God revealed in nature. If
there is any religious teacher or preacher who
cannot so see and represent the unity of these
two ideas as to harmonic his board or church.
let him stick to his creed and avoid contro-
versy, remembering that the gospel has no
controversy with this earth as a planet,