« PreviousContinue »
a law which runs through all created that on them, as elsewhere, Scripture and things, down to the moss which struggles science will be ultimately found to coinfor existence on the rock ?
cide. Do I say that this is all? That man is But here we have to face an objection merely a part of Nature, the puppet of cir- which you will often hear ņow from cumstances and hereditary tendencies ? scientific men and still oftener from nonThat brute competition is the one law of scientific men; who will say — It matters his life? That he is doomed for ever to not to us whether Scripture contradicts or be the slave of his own needs, enforced by does not contradict à scientific natural an internecine struggle for existence ? theology; for we hold such a science to be God forbid. I believe not only in Nature, impossible and naught. The old Jews put but in Grace. I believe that this is man's a God into Nature, and therefore of course fate only as long as he sows to the flesh, they could see, as you see, what they had and of the flesh reaps corruption. I be- already put there. But we see no God in lieve that if he will
Nature. We do not deny the existence of
a God; we merely say that scientific re“ strive upward, working out the beast,
search does not reveal him to us. And let the ape and tiger die;'
no marks of design in physical phenomeif he will be even as wise as the social ani- na.
What used to be considered mals; as the ant and the bee, who have marks of design can be better explained risen, if not to the virtue of all-embracing by considering them as the results of evocharity, at least to the virtues of self-sacri- | lution according to necessary laws; and fice and patriotism,* then he will rise to a you and Scripture make a mere assumphigher sphere; toward that kingdom of tion when you ascribe them to the operaGod of which it is written, He that, tion of a mind like the human mind. dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God
Now, on this point I believe we may in him."
answer fearlessly — If you cannot see it Whether that be matter of natural the- we cannot help you. If the heavens do ology, I cannot tell as yet. But as for all not declare to you the glory of God, nor the former questions — all that St. Paul the firmament show you His handiwork, means when he talks of the law, and how then our poor arguments about them will the works of the flesh bring men under the not shew it. “ The eye can only see that law, stern and terrible and destructive, which it brings with it the power of seethough holy and just and good — they are ing.” We can only reassert that we see matter of natural theology; and I believe design everywhere, and that the vast ma
jority of the human race in every age and
clime has seen it. Analogy from experiI am well aware what a serious question is opened up in these words. The fact that the great ence, sound induction (as we hold) from înajority of workers among the social insects are the works not only of men but of animals, barren females or nuns, devoting themselves to the has made it an all but self-evident truth to self-sacritice, and that by means of thiát self-sacri- us, that wherever there is arrangement, fice these communities grow large and prosperous, there must be an arranger; wherever ought to be well weighed just now; both by those there is adaptation of means to an end, cuptions of what was useful or pleasurable, and by there must be an adapter; wherever an table and eternal. Those who take the former.view. The existence of a designing God is no more those who hold as I do that morality is one, immu- organization, there must be an organizer. (confounding, as Mr. Mivart well points out, “material” and ** formal" morality) have no difficulty demonstrable from Nature than the existin animals ; for
self-interest is, in their eyes, the ulence of other human beings independent timate ground of morality, and the average animal of ourselves, or, indeed, the existence of is utterly seltish. But certain animals perform acts, our own bodies. But, like the belief in 8: in the case of working bees and ants, and (as I hold) in the case of mothers working for and pro- them, the belief in Him has become an artecting their otlspring, which at least s?em formally ticle of our common sense. And that this I am well aware, I say again, of the very serious designing mind is, in some respects, simadmissions which we clergymen should have to ilar to the human mind, is proved to us make. if we confessed that these acts really are that (as Sir John Herschel well puts it) by should not be as just to an ant as to a human being; the mere fact that we can discover and I am ready, with Socrates, to follow
the Logos comprehend the processes of Nature. whithersoever it leads; and I hope that Mr Mivart
But here again, if we be contradicted, will reconsider the two latter paragraphs of p. 196, and let his “ thoughts play freely " round this cu- we can only reassert. If the old words, rious subject. Perhaps, in so doing, he may lay his • He that made the eye, shall he not see? hand on an even sharper weapon than those which be has already used against the sensationalist theory he that planted the ear, shall he not of morals.
hear?” do not at once commend them
selves to the intellect of any person, we men than I have fears on this point. I shall never convince that person by any cannot share in them. arguments drawn from the absurdity of All, it seems to me, that the new docconceiving the invention of optics by a trines of evolution demand is this. We blind race, or of music by a deaf one. all agree, for the fact is patent, that our
So we will assert our own old-fashioned own bodies, and indeed the body of every notion boldly; and more : we will say, living creature, are evolved from a seemin spite of ridicule, that if such a God ex- ingly simple germ by natural laws without ists, final causes must exist also. That visible action of any designing will or the whole universe must be one chain of mind, into the full organization of a hufinal causes. That if there be a Supreme man or other creature. Yet we do not Reason, he must have a reason, and that a say, on that account God did not cregood reason, for every physical phenome- ate me: I only grew. We hold in this
case to our old idea, and say — If there be We will tell the modern scientific man evolution, there must be an evolver. Now - You are nervously afraid of the mention the new physical theories only ask us, it of final causes. You quote against them seems to me, to extend this conception to Bacon's saying, that they are barren vir- the whole universe : to believe that not gins; that no physical fact was ever dis-individuals merely, but whole varieties and covered or explained by them. You are races, the total organized life on this planright as far as regards yourselves; you et, and it may be the total organization of have no business with final causes, because the universe, have been evolved just as final causes are moral causes, and you are our bodies are, by natural laws acting physical students only. We, the natural through circumstance. This may be true, theologians, have business with them. or may be false. But all its truth can do Your duty is to find out the How of to the natural theologian will be to make things; ours, to find out the Why. If you him believe that the Creator bears the rejoin that we shall never find out the same relation to the whole universe as that Why, unless we first learn something of Creator undeniably bears to every individthe How, we shall not deny that. It may ual human body. be most useful, I had almost said neces- I entreat you to weigh these words, sary, that the clergy should have some sci- which have not been written in haste; and entific training. It may be most use- I entreat you also, if you wish to see how ful, I sometimes dream of a day when little the new theory, that species may it will be considered necessary, that have been gradually created by variation, every candidate for ordination should be natural selection, and so forth, interferes required to have passed creditably in at with the old theory of design, contrivance, least one branch of physical science, if it and adaptation, nay, with the fullest adbe only to teach him the method of sound mission of benevolent final causes - I enscientific thought. But our having learnt treat you, I say, to study Darwin's “ Ferthe How, will not make it needless, much tilization of Orchids". - a book which less impossible, for us to study the Why. (whether his main theory be true or not) It will merely make more clear to us the will still remain a most valuable addition things of which we have to study the to natural theology. Why; and enable us to keep the How and For suppose, gentlemen, that all the the Why more religiously apart from each species of Orchids, and not only they, but other.
- the Gingers, the ArrowBut if it be said, After all, there is no roots, the Bananas — are all the descendWhy: the doctrine of evolution, by doing ants of one original form, which was most away with the theory of creation, does probably nearly allied to the Snowdrop away with that of final causes, - let us and the Iris. What then ? Would that answer, boldly, Not in the least. We be one whit more wonderful, more might accept all that Mr. Darwin, all that worthy of the wisdom and power of God, Professor Huxley, has so learnedly and so than if they were, as most believe, creacutely written on physical science, and ated each and all at once, with their miyet preserve our natural theology on ex- nute and often imaginary shades of difactly the same basis as that on which But- ference? What would the natural theoler and Paley left it. That we should logian have to say, were the first theory have to develop it, I do not deny. That true, save that God's works are even more we should have to relinquish it, I do. wonderful than he always believed them
Let me press this thought earnestly on to be? As for the theory being imposyou. I know that many wiser and better sible: we must leave the discussion of that
to physical students. It is not for us means, the How of Creation, is nowhere clergymen to limit the power of God. specified. Scripture, again, says that “Is anything too hard for the Lord ?” organized beings were produced each asked the prophet of old : and we have a according to their kind. But it nowhere right to ask it as long as time shall last. defines that term. What a kind includes, If it be said that natural selection is too whether it includes or not the capacity of simple a cause to produce such fantastic varying (which is just the question in variety: that, again, is a question to be point), is nowhere specified. And I think settled exclusively by. physical students. it a most important rule in scriptural All we have to say on the matter is, that exegesis, to be most cautious as to limitwe always knew that God works by very ing the meaning of any term which Scripsimple, or seemingly simple, means; that ture itself has not limited, lest we find ourthe whole universe, as far as we could selves putting into the teaching of Scripdiscern it, was one concatenation of the ture our own human theories or prejudices. most simple means; that it was wonder- And consider, Is not man a kind? And ful, yea, miraculous, in our eyes, that a has not mankind varied, physically, intelchild should resemble its parents, that the lectually, spiritually? Is not the Bible, raindrops should make the grass grow, from, beginning to end, a history of the that the grass should become flesh, and variations of mankind, for worse or for the flesh sustenance for the thinking brain better, from their original type ? of man. Ought God to seem less or more Let us rather look with calmness, and august in our eyes, when we are told that even with hope and goodwill, on these His means are even more simple than we new theories; for, correct or incorrect, supposed? We held him to be Almighty they surely mark a tendency toward a and Allwise. Are we to reverence Him more, not a less, scriptural view of Nature. less or more, if we hear that His might Are they not attempts, whether successful is greater, His wisdom deeper, than we or unsuccessful, to escape from that shalever dreamed ? We believed that His low mechanical notion of the universe and care was over all His works; that His its Creator which was too much in vogue Providence watched perpetually over the in the eighteenth century among divines whole universe. We were taught — some as well as philosophers; the theory which of us at least — by Holy Scripture, to be- Goethe (to do him justice), and after him lieve that the whole history of the uni- Mr. Thomas Carlyle, have treated with verse was made up of special Providences.' such noble scorn; the theory, I mean, that If, then, that should be true which Mr. God has wound up the universe like a Darwin writes — “ It may be metaphori- clock, and left it to tick by itself till it cally said that natural selection is daily runs down, never troubling Himself with and hourly scrutinizing throughout the it, save possibly for even that was only world, every variation, even the slightest; half believed by rare miraculous interrejecting that which is bad, preserving and ferences with the laws which He Himself adding up that which is good, silently and had made ? Out of that chilling dream incessantly working whenever and wher- of a dead universe ungoverned by an ever opportunity offers at the improvement absent God, the human mind, in Germany of every organic being,” — if that, I say, especially, tried during the early part of were proven to be true, ought God's care this century to escape by strange roads ; and God's providence to seem less or more roads by which there was no escape, bemagnificent in our eyes? Of old it was cause they were not laid down on the firm said by Him without whom nothing is ground of scientific facts. Then, in demade, - My Father worketh hitherto, and spair, men turned to the facts which they I work." "Shall we quarrel with Science had neglected, and said, We are weary of if she should show how those words are philosophy: we will study you, and you true ? What, in one word, should we alone. . As for God, who can find Him ? have to say but this ? — We knew of old And they have worked at the facts like that God was so wise that He could make gallant and honest men; and their work, all things: but behold, He is so much like all good work, has produced, in the wiser than even that, that He can make all last fifty years, results more things make themselves.
than they even dreamed. But what are But it may be said — These notions are they finding, more and more, below their contrary to Scripture. I must beg very facts, below all phenomena which the humbly, but very firmly, to demur to that scalpel and the microscope can show ? A opinion. Scripture says that God created. something nameless, invisible, imponderaBut it nowhere defines that term. The ble, yet seemingly omnipresent and omnip
otent, retreating before them deeper and seen ? — but by the only metaphor adedeeper, the deeper they delve : namely, quate to express the perpetual and omnithe life which shapes and makes — that present miracle) - The Breath of God; which the old-school men called “ forma The Spirit who is The Lord and Giver of formativa," which they call vital force and Life. what not — metaphors all, or rather count- In the rest, gentlemen, let us think, and ers to mark an unknown quantity, as if let us observe. For if we are ignorant, they should call it x or y. One says — It not merely of the results of experimental is all vibrations; but his reason, unsatis- science, but of the methods thereof, then fied, asks — And what makes the vibra- we and the men of science shall have no tions vibrate? Another — It is all physi- common ground whereon to stretch out ological units; but his reason asks, What kindly hands to each other. is the “physis,” the nature and “innate But let us have patience and faith; and tendency” of the units ? A third — It not suppose in haste, that when those may be all caused by infinitely numerous hands are stretched out it will be needful “ gemmules ;” but his reason asks him, for us to leave our standing-ground, or to What puts infinite order into these gem- cast ourselves down from the pinnacle of mules, instead of infinite anarchy? I the temple to earn popularity; above all, mention these theories not to laugh at from earnest students who are too highthem. No man has a deeper respect for minded to care for popularity themselves. those who have put them forth. Nor True, if we have an intelligent belief in would it interfere with my theological those Creeds and those Scriptures which creed, if any or all of them were proven to are committed to our keeping, then our be true to-morrow. I mention them only philosophy cannot be that which is just to show that beneath all these theories - now in vogue. But all we have to do, I true or false — still lies the unknown x. believe, is to wait. Nominalism, and that Scientific men are becoming more and “ Sensationalism ” which has sprung from more aware of it; I had almost said, ready nominalism, are running fast to seed; to worship it. More and more the noblest-Comtism seems to me its supreme effort : minded of them are engrossed by the after which the whirligig of Time may mystery of that unknown and truly mirac- bring round its revenges; and Realism, ulous element in Nature, which is always and we who hold the Realist creeds, may escaping them, though they cannot escape have our turn. Only wait. When a it. How should they escape it? Was it grave, able, and authoritative philosopher not written of old — “ Whither shall I go explains a mother's love of her newborn from Thy presence, or whither shall I flee babe, as Professor Bain has done, in a from Thy spirit ?'
really eloquent passage of his book on the Ah that we clergy would summon up Emotions and the Will," * then the end conrage to tell them that! Courage to of that philosophy is very near: and an tell them — what need not hamper for a older, simpler, more human, and, as I hold, moment the freedom of their investiga- more philosophic explanation of that nattions, what will add to them a sanction, I ural phenomenon, and of all others, may may say a sanctity — that the unknown x get a hearing. which lies below all phenomena, which is Only wait : and fret not yourselves, else for ever at work on all phenomena, on the shall you be moved to do evil. Rememwhole and on every part of the whole, ber the saying of the wise man —“ Go not down to the colouring of every leaf and after the world. She turns on her axis; the curdling of every cell of protoplasm, and if thou stand still long enough, she is none other than that which the old will turn round to thee." Hebrews called — (by a metaphor, no doubt – for how can man speak of the
Second edition, pp. 78, 79. unseen, save in metaphors drawn from the
The Island of Sicily seems to be very fairly large portion of them more or less scientific or supplied with newspapers. Not fewer thin a literary. In Palermo alone, omitting the comhundred journals, daily, weekly, fortnightly, mercial periodicals, there are five journals for and monthly, are published in Sicily, thirty- medicine, two for literature, one for architeceight in Palermo itself, thirteen in Messini, ture, two for art, and one för jurisprudence. seven or eight in Catania, five in Syracuse, a
IN TWO CHAPTERS.
From Chambers' Journal. mustered — had been solicited to keep AT THE MORGANS'.
or to break the peace - to assault or to protect the electors, I'm not sure which. I have no doubt that, well supplied and
fortified with beer, they did all that was I was wont after the fatigues of the day required of them, and probably something to smoke a pipe the kitchen at the more. Elections were often rather wild Morgans'. My acquaintance with old and desperate work in that part of the Becky, however, I am bound to say, did country, and generally tended to the innot advance very much — for one reason, crease of Dr. Jenkins's list of patients. perhaps, that she could not or would not However, I was not much interested in the speak English, and my command of Welsh matter the proceedings were carried on, was certainly circumscribed. I had picked indeed, at a considerable distance from up a few words, and dealt these out very Llanberig -- so I had returned to the incessantly. Becky would nod and laugh, farm some hours in advance of my usual but she generally contented herself with time, and Becky, quickly interpreting my replying “ Dim Sassenach," let me ad- pantomimic request for refreshment, had dress her in what tongue I would. She just supplied my wants, when Davy enwas heedful of my requirements, if no tered, conversationally inclined in regard great cordiality characterized her bearing to his past life as a wine-merchant at towards me. I was often tempted to sus-Cardiff. pect that Becky for one would not be He sighed as he finished speaking, and sorry when the time arrived for my turn- passed his hand across his forehead. He ing my back upon Llanberig. Still, she seemed somewhat moved and distressed was noway deficient in those hospitable by the nature of his reminiscences. I setefforts for which Wales is noted, and at tled in my own mind that he had seen what may be called “cottage cooking”. better days, and that a collapse had at for the little farm-house did not really pre- some time or other afflicted the flourishing tend to much more Becky was supreme. business at Cardiff. Somehow, very flourThe breakfasts and suppers she prepared ishing businesses, I've noticed, have a cufor my consumption were perfect in their rious predisposition to collapse. I quietly way:
continued the process of emptying my jug ** When I was at Cardiff, I did not care of beer. for malt liquors. You find the ale to your
“I daresay, now, you've tasted very good liking? I'm glad of that. It seems to me wine in your time ?” he said presently. rather poor stuff. I only wish I could I replied that, for a poor man, leading offer you something more worthy of your rather a rough and uncertain life, I had drinking. In my time I've drunk of the upon the whole done very fairly in that best — the very best. We had a fine respect. I had sat at rich men's feasts stock of very choice wines at Cardiff; now and then, and found myself fronted there was no one to compare with us in by very excellent drinks. the whole principality; we did an excel- “ You don't prefer beer to wine, then ? " lent business. I might have driven my I avowed that I did not, while admitting carriage, if I had been so minded. The the admirable character of the malt liquors - best of everything was to be found at my in the jug on the table — as good a brew table: some of the wines that I was able of malt, I said, as a man could wish to to set before my guests were unique
drink. quite unique - though I say it. But times “ And you've got a good palate for wine are changed — times are sadly changed." - for port wine, say?"
Davy Morgan was the speaker. I had I thought I was fairly provided for as to returned from the works rather earlier palate, and knew a good glass of wine than usual; the men had “knocked off,” when I found one. He seemed to grow and made half holiday -- I forget now the more and more interested in the conversaprecise reason for this proceeding, but I'm tion to be even somewhat excited by it. inclined to think that there was some elec- He came quite close up to me as he said: tion business on hand. One of my direc- “ May I ask, now, if you have ever tasted tors had, I know, been canvassing the Comet Port ?.” county, or a division of it, with a view to I said I believed that upon some special representing it in parliament. Very likely occasion - probably at some City Comthe nomination or the polling came off pany's dinner, so far as I could recollect, about this period, and the aid of my but I wasn't quite sure - I had tasted, as navvies — as many of them as could be a curiosity, some port wine so described.