The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-27

trial for heresy in the Scotch Free
church, and referred to the author as a
literary wizard. He said it was quite pos
sible the book might prove merely pre-
tentious airing of pet hobby" as were
some OF his previous works. He doubted
whether the scientific world cared to be
responsible FOR the utterances of Drum
mond. He had failed to find many refer
ences to or quotations from it in current
scientific literature.
The speaker continued: The great
underlying objection to the book, IN my
mind is the confident assumption that
evolution, technical evolution, the evolu-
ton of ultra science, is true beyond con-
troversy, that it IS, as he said, neither more
nor less than the story OF creation as told
by those who know it best The last re-
treat OF evolutionists is embryoiogy, and 1t
is broadly and openly announced by eVo-
lutionists pursuing this branch OF science
that the demonstration of the theory is
ocular here, and DR.. Drummond makes
large use of the claim. l must be allowed
TO plead that the showing has not been
conclusive to me, that the semblances
have been fanciful and the implications
far fetched, and the appearances explained
themselves by the theory rather than the
theory by them.
"a contemporary scholar says Darwin
was not SO ambitious as Drummond. This
remark is called out by the fact that Oar
win, and indeed the body of evolutionlsts
after him, have contented themselves with
applying it to organisms, while Drummond
carries It fearlessly into the realm OF mind
and spirit.
nernt TO the paper and said he wished that
wherever the disease CDR. Drummond' s
doctrines) goes the remedy Mr.. Flben s
paper might go also.
Rev. Mr.. Simons thought the work
.tNatural Laws in the Spiritual World" y
had mischievous tendencies. Spiritual
laws were on higher plane than natural
laws in his opinion.
DIR. Case thought the paper in most re-
spects an admirable one, yet he hoped 1T
would not be given permanent form in
publication, for fifteen years hence Brother
Filben might wish he had not written it.
He. believed DR.. Drummond had done
much good in the world by means OF his
thought in original lines. One OF the au-
thors best thoughts is that evolution re-
nuires involution and that involutlon is
from God. 1t is Gods method.
Rev. +. D. Bovard considered the work
under discussion an excellent one. He
characterized Drummond as strong man
leading inquirers through the labyrinth OF
thought. He was sorry the essaylst had
condemned evolution IN such strong IAN
cuage. 81 believe in the truth OF evolution
eas. a description of the process OF world
making and of life proceeding from step
to step. The proposition OF evolution is
settling down to the point where the
Christian world may accept It,
DR.. Ollie thought Drummond,s great
name had foated the book rather than that
the work had stood on its merit. lie had
observed that the book WAS not Endorsed
by either evangelical or scientific classes.
Both object TO 1t.
DIR. Case again spoke to the question,
saving that the work under discussion
showed the method of God IN the long
swing of the ages. The author had not yet
completely evolved his philosophy, Ii
had not been completed. He had led up
TO theism but not yet to Christianity,
though it might reach that acme. He had
given a cleW to Gods methods. The
burden of the weight of sympathy in the
Christian world was with Drummond. 9
stand for Drummond," said DIR. Case. 81
nave found his Natural Laws in the
Spiritual World helpful"
z. P. bennett said he considered IL
great mistake for ministers to assume the
attitude of antagonism toward scientific
thought. Brilliant minds are too prone to
assume in that case the attitude OF IN
dorsing the latter rather than the former.
Dr. Carroll thought the works OF Drum
mond would not stand the test OF logic.
They contain the essence of skeptlclsm.
Dr.. McClish had not read the entire
book. 1t had failed to "hold'' him, yet the
impression it gave of altruism was the
greatest truth of the world. Altruism was
The truth that nature had been whispering
through all the ages. He believed the
fundamental principles of evolution and
the truths of Christianity would both 1--we.
He was sorry to see ministers don war
paint and go out to fight evolution: They
Eould be sorry for it as those who had
Fought geology had become sorry Tor 1T.
DR.. Masters said he had no patience with
materialistic evolution.
Rev. r. E. Wepck said: "There is