Year: 1871




preSxisting materials by of powerswhich nave
been organized by the Divine wisdom ALLOW that
nlants and animals are now formed from germs or
! if Won please from highly endowed hattor' 'ne
further question, Whether they are propagoted w
| special acts of creation, or by Tue pro
| cess of evolution, is not question that
| co,carns religion The author dwells on TIN I
point with great force. He insists that Chris
| tians may hold in perfect accordance with Their
faith that certain layers of rock on the ealhs sur
face were formed through the action of water and
fire and not by an immediate fiat of God. They are
at equal liberty to hold that higher plants and ami
mails have been developed from lower according to


the laws of natural descent operating under favora-
ble conditions. Correctly understood there is moth
ing irrelgius in the idea of development We have
constant experience of the development Of individ-
ual plants and animals from parent plants and ami
mails. The development of a new species from the
crossing of two species, in favorable circumstances
is equally natural, nor, in any respect, more ncon-
sistent with religion.


Mr.. Darwin's theory of natural selection, while op-
posed by such menas Agassiz in this country, and
the school of Mne-Edwards i'll France, cannot claim
to be dcfnitivey settled, but in the opinion of the
author. it contains nothing at with religion,
while it comprises large body of important truths.
In this spirit of concession, Dr. McCosh approaches





gested by the results of modern scientific research
Although his mental sylnpathies are widely removed
from the apparent tendencies of physical science at
the present day. he has no word of condemnation for
Its prominent cutivaors. He has evidently studied


their theories with earnest attentions he fully COM
prehends their purpose and scope; and, though far
from admitting their conclusions, does justice TO
their innOcuous character in their application to re-
| ligiOn.


A brief section of the volume, devoted to what the
author oddly enough terms Boston Theology is re-
| markable for the curious transformation of its
statements and the confusion of thought with
which il descants certain familiar Ncw-England
| names. An apology for its blunders may be found
in the fact that the writer is comparative stranger
to the progress of American culture. though it
| should have protected him from utterng such flip
pant comments on a subject which he had not taken
! the pains to understand In the first place, it
! is strange msnOmer to speak of Boston
! theology. Whatever ties of friendship may ex-
| ist among the thinking men Of that vicin-
! itv. there is not, and never has been, the
! slightest unity of opinion. There is no creed
| or confession of faith, TO which any two persons
| would give common assent. Dr. Channlng, Ihe0-
dOre Parker Mr. Emerson, whom Dr. McCosh puts
forward as the exponents of the Boston theology,
represent nobody but themselves There was no
harmony of thought among those eminent men, no
similarity of speculation, no desire or power of
founding school. They agreed scarcely on a single
point but attachment to individual freedom. Nor,
profound and wide as has been their influence, was
it ever exerted in favor of a specific body of doc
trine They have been accepted representa-
tyes of thought among the clergy lay of Boston,
even among those of the Unitarian faith with whom
they sustained intimate social and personal rela-
tOns. There was always protest against their au-
thorty and influence from the leading theOlogians
of that city, and they always more or less decidedly
protested against each other Their views all
subjects were strictly individual. They called
man master, and accepted no man as a disciple
They formed party, elevated no banner, pro-
pounded no system. Whatever condolences of feel
ing or of faith existed among them, between them
and their admirers. who certainly listened with
reverence and rapture to their words, and recognized
an inspiring influence from them upon their char
acter these due not TO the authority of master


ship hut to the exercise of private individuality. 1t
would be no less absurd to speak of New York theO
! Ogy as a unit, with Mr. Bcecher DR.. Chaplin. Mr.
| rockingham, DIR. Tying, and DR.. Thompson as its


exponents, than TO describe specific Boston tbeo-


ogy under the leadership of the great thinkers whose
| names are mentioned in that capacity by d.. Nc
Gosh.


Nor was the intellectual movement which he has


III Wow OF peculiarly III was


rather an appeal in favor of liberty and light, than


an effort for doctrnal reform. DR.. Claiming


emphatically teacher of ethics; he addressed him


self to the universal moral sentiments of humanity;
| his theological productions derive their chief in
| terest from the occasions which called them
| forth but his trumpet-tOned summons for
| justice to the human soul has touched
chord of sympathy that has not yet ceased to vibrate
in the common heart of the age. He was singularly
averse to all sectaTian names; he reached the


turty of his intellect subtle questions Of speculation
lost their charm; far from being the representa-
tive of creed he stood almost alone in the strength
and purity of his solitary genius and rising above
the nurky region of theological strife his great heart
throbbed only for freedom humanity, ard God Nor
can Theodore Parker he called the founder of any
definite system of theology There is no doctrine with
which his name can be distinctly associated. He,
indeed, made terrible assault on what he deemed


the errors of the traditional faith of New-England
but this was in the interest of human progress, not
of theological creed. His whole heart was bound mp
i'll the simplest conceptions of religion, which with
| him was matter of feeling and common sense
rather than of abstract speculation. Even if lie
cherished the ambition to stand at the head Of q
movement in behalf of a purer theology, with the
glory of God and the good of souls in view, it
was claim that was never credited by the
clergy, or the elerisy of Boston, and never
gave him a title 10 be regarded the
representative of new faith with the sign
manual Of that intellectual city. Still less has M
Emerson ever made any pretnsion to being master
in theology. Everything in the shape of creed, a
system, formula, method, had almost said, Of
distinct thought is abhOrrent to his nature. His
ire E6nGs delights In the vague brilliant flashes of
mystical contemplation, his true sphere is in the
cold and lofty nights of pure imagination where he
Ican indulge the austere musings of suggestive in
tcllect free from the disturbance of human passion
and with sublime scorn of reducing the prompt