The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1918-01-19
GREATER CHANGES WILL
COME"

cdtcu diIlcle HAS Deeu going the
rounds of our Sunday papers. 1t
is therein stated in Substance that
evolution is responsible for the
development Of man in his pres
ent state. The confusion of ideas
in this modern so-called philoso-
ply touches the apogee of intel
lectual farce.
A quotation is given from an
English naturalist: 'The differ
ence between a highly developed
and civilized man and a low
savage is greater than the differ
ence between that savage and the
blade Of grass. The writer goes
on to say that, the marvellous
changes that have gone before
during millions of years past are
to be followed by changes more
marvellous i'll the millions OF years
that are to come"
One Of the characteristics Of
certain group of scientists is the
audacity with which they make
unproven statements: an audacity
equalled only by their airiness in
speaking Of millions Of years.
Darwin startled the world some
years ago with his theory Of evo-
luton, of gradual development
from the lowest to the highest
form of life. While the ''plot" of
the DarWinian comedy seemed to
work out theoretically, time was
when the theorists came to an inn
passable gap. 1t was not clear
just what form Of life should be
placed i'll the breach between in
telligent man and the llnintelli-
gent animal. This difficulty, how
ever, was easily solved by the in
vention of a lnan-ape. We were
complacently told that man was
but the latest descendant Of the
venerable gorilla. The missing link
was declared to be the connecting
bond between pure man and pure
animal Presentaday evolutionists
have gotten away from the orig
inal DarWinian theory, but have
retained the chief features of
evolution. Syndicated articles
from time to time present fanciful
and fantastical applications Of
this poetic but Unscientific ideal,
and the ignorant and the cred
ulous stand aghast with amaz-
ment at the wonderful revelations
Of Sunday supplement philosophy.
It is noticeable that evolution in
its various phases ignores one fac
tor in life: essential difference
between intellect and sense, be-
tween mind and instinct, between
man and the animal. When we
are told ghbly that the difference
between a savage and man OF
culture is greater than that be-
tween the savage and a blade OF
grass, evolution ignores the fun
damental difference between the
words, degree and kind. Both the
savage and the professor belong
to the same human kind; they
differ in degree of mental develop
ment; man and the blade of grass
differ essentially in kind.
While it is no doubt true that
man is susceptible of intellectual
development-We see this all
through history, and it is going
on at PRESENT. were utter folly
to refuse to recognize the radical
distinction between man, even In
his lowest state, and the very
highest form of irrational life.
The fact, however, that various
forms Of living creatures go
through a process OF development
similar to that Of the egg and the
bird, or of a cocoon and the but
terfly, does not by any manner OF
means indicate that this process
can be or is continued indefinitely
through stages beyond the form
fixed by nature herself.
Evolution speaks POLITICALLY of
the journey Of life from the least
imaginable form to the highest,
from the amoeba to the philoso-
.pher. Throughout this whole
process, however, evolution ig-
.nores completely the laws of ma
ture which have fixed and deter
mined certain forms which are the
goal or terminus of essential de-
velopment in any fixed sphere. In
other words, a tree is always a
tree, leopard is always a
leopard, man always a man, in
spite Of constant changes for the
better which may add somewhat
to the becomingness, beauty, or
.dexterity Of the individual.
Coming down to rock bottom,
evolution never can account for
the nature Of the world or OF life
until it explains the connecting