The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-05-25

copy and study the volume that possesses
such deep interest for students of the hui
man mind. II, as The AprEAL thinks, his
skepticism was in any wise dues TO hisscien- |
tifc researches, IL Is a sorrowful thought 10
us who can enjoy his science and yet retain
our delightful faith in Jesus Christ and his
Bible. But imagine that The APrEAL is
somewhat hasty in its deductions. Charles
Darwin had the misfortune to be born and
bred under skeptical influences. His father
and his grandfather are known TO have been
disbelievers. And Charles Darwin was man
well advanced in life before he had satisfied
himself Of the truth OF that theory which
will be forever associated with his name.
''Darwinism," in the language of scientists,
signifies especially the doctrine Of Natural
Selection" And 1t is an open question
among them how much can be accounted for
| by this doctrine More recent evolutionists
of eminence seem inclined TO think
less OF 1t than Darwin did, though
they, one and all, ascribc without hesitation
| the first place in the science of this century
TO Darwin. But surely any one possessed of
ordinary intelligence can see the difference
between the skepticism Of Darwin person.
ally and the theological import of Darwin's
science. Surely any man can believe In
natural selection" as q mode OF Gods prov
idential action In the world. II he believes
In an Almighty personal God at all, the au-
thor and upholder of nature. My friend,
DIR. Woodrow, does not profess TO be Oar
winian," as scientists use that term. He
holds with St. George Miyart and many 9TH
ers that Nature often proceeds per saltum
accomplishing her ends by wide leaps, 80
that there Is no such missing link" often
times as "Darwinism" presupposes. Above
all DIR. Woodrow Is devout theist holding
that all the processes Of nature are pervaded
and controlled by Gods presence and power.
One thing more. The ArPEAL takes II for
granted that II any one admits the truth OF
evolution, he thereby commits himself TO
the opinion that mankind are descended
from the Smi@. am not an evolutionist
myself; because among other possible rea-
sons ] have not the technical education that
enables me TO Judge OF the evidence. But
The APPEAL is too generous and addicted TO
"fair play" 10 forbid me TO cite the words Of
one whom it will admit TO be immeasurably
better qualified TO speak on this point than
either II or its correspondent l mean Prof.
Gray, who has shed glory upon the science of
the new world. On page 100 OF Natural
Science and Religion" the scientist thus
speaks:
"a totally unknown ancestry has the
characteristics OF nobility. The evolution
ist can give one satisfactory assurance. As
the wolf In the fable was captious in his
complaints that the lamb below had mud
died the brook he was drinking from, SO
those are mistaken who suppose that the
simian race can have deiiled the stream
} along which evolution traces human de.
scent. Sober cvolutionists do not suppose
J that man has descended from monkeys,
, The stream must have branched too carly
for that The resemblances, which are the
same, In fact under any theory, are
supposed 10 denote collateral relationship
, This, take IT, coming from the source II
docs, pretty effectuhlly disposcs OF the cpl
thets such as 'npeism," APE theology v
''son of n monkey" etc. etc, in which some
! Of TmE ArPEAL's theological allies take greai
delight, and, indeed In which they find all
, their strength. am sure The ArrEAL will
gladly aid me in trying TO keep them within
, parliamentary rules while attempting tC
deal with such great questions.
, wM. Y. Bocos.
! p. S.-wheneycr Tue ArrKAL and IL
friends skeptical or orthodox. grow tired o
the old gears" the mud, the rain, and the
strong language, let them remember tina
the latch string hangs ON the outside Of th'
cabin door, aud they shall have the best Ia
our larder. w. +. b.
} $40 Shelby street, May %, 1855.