Widnes Examiner. — 1887-03-26 (Widnes, Cheshire, England)

THOUGHT 3 ON MR. PEERS' "THOUGHTS."  Bir,—l thank you for allowing me to reply once more to Mr. Peers. lam glad that Mr. Peers accepts my letter as the honest expression of my opinions, and I freely ext-nd the same courtesy to him. lam sorry he should think I got into a rage. In this be was quite mistaken, as. I assure hirm my normal temperature was not in the least increased by the perusal of hi&" thoughts." He need not be at all nervous about me. . . . .  _ I notice that he abandons his positions on Anthropology and Evolution, aad pins me down hard and fast to Chronology. He accuses me of "trying to tinker the word of God so as to make it square with the revelations of science." Now, sir, I did no ouch thing; neither have I attempted to "pare and shape" the statements of Moses. If he will take the trouble to read my letter again he will find that I merle no mention of the six days—nor yet of any " isdefinite periods," Neither did I attempt to mutilate and stultify the Word of God. Ought I net rather to say "Thou art the man?" and, tasteful of bins asking the silly question, " has it required the lapse of all these desolate centuries and.,the appearance d such luminaries as Dawson, Gaudy, &Co ," ought he let to have said—it has re., qdired the lapse or all these desolate centuries and the appearance of such luminaries as Darwin, Spencer, Peers, dr . .  to expound this text to the world? But it is ever the habit of certain dabblers in science to decry the intelligence of those who differ from them. I like that remark of his about "these poor people." It is so modest and considerate of him, you know. Now as to these actual facts of geology and the statement of Moses. Cannot Mr. Peers see that these said facts—so called—are merely assumptions? Can he sanely contend that one mind in ten thousand, or one in a hundred thousand, can ascertain these facts for himself? Are they capable of demonstration with the exactness of Euclid? And can they ever to the vast majority of minds be anything more than mere statements? And since cosmogony and its sister sciences are the subjects of the first chapter of the Bible. would Mr. Peers—as a kind of preparatory course—make Darwinian and Spencerian philosophers of men before teaching them the truth of religion ? Now the moral of all this is.—don't dogmatize. Scientists,. no more than theologians, have any excuse for doing so. Science is still in its infancy, and has many surprises yet in store for us. The one hope for science is mere science. Bacon says—" This I dare affirm in knowledge of natn-e, that a little na'ural philosophy, and the first entrance into It. does dispose the opinion to Atheism ; but, on the other side, much uctural philosophy, and deep wading into it, will bring about men's minds to religion." I Now I quite agree with Mr. Peers that it is not essential to true religion that a man should believe in the Mosaic account of the creation. The beauty and morality of religion can not, in my opinion, be lessened by any discoveries of science. But all the same, I maintain that Mosee has not yet been disproved. Eminent authorities are not wanting who affirm that tbs account of the creation as given by ' Mines Is exactly in accordance with modern theories. The six days may be only an allegory, bnt to me it is quite immaterial whether a man believes in six days or six periods. As to the Sabbath, I certainly believe its origin was divine. In any cane. I gratefully accept it as a fact. It has been a priceless boon to myriads upon myriads of the human family, and is certainly not indebted for its origin to 'lux. Icy, Tyndal, and Co. Now. lam not unmindful of, nor do I under estimate, the splendid services these men have rendered to the cause of science, but I cannot join issue with , them in their materialistic and evolutionist views. I In conclusion, it is not true that Hugh Miller "Fought refuge in suicide from the difficulties of reconciling the undoubted facts of geology with the statements of Moses." Irritation of the brain, brought on by protracted inflammation of the lungs, was the cause of his suicide. He is still Considered an authority by geologists well abreast of the times. Warrington. March net, 188 f.