6z6 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



tho pathway of investigation, and then de- 

 nounce the antagonism of science, and the 

 aKo-ressiveness of its cultivators because 



DO 



they will hold to their old course and drive on. 

 In the present phase of the conflict, it is in- 

 sisted upon, with a strange perversity, that 

 Science is somehow the rival of the Deity ; 

 that what Science gains, the Creator loses. 

 To the vulgar religious mind, thunder and 

 lightning were formerly regarded as the im- 

 mediate displays of Divine power and inter- 

 vention in the management of earthly af- 

 fairs, and, when Science affirmed that it 

 could discern the promise and potency of 

 these effects in matter, the ignorant theolo- 

 gian protested that God was in this way 

 expelled from so much of his universe. Sci- 

 ence has thus been interpreted as driving 

 him out of sphere after sphere, until at last 

 only a corner of the universe remains where 

 the operations of the Divinity can be seen, 

 and that is the realm of life. Prof. Tyn- 

 dall now comes forward and says that he 

 sees also in matter the promise and potency 

 of every form of life, and the cry is raised 

 that this is the final audacious aggression 

 of Science, which drives the Divinity from 

 the universe, and lands the human mind in 

 scientific materialism and scientific athe- 

 ism. If we understand Dr. Martineau, he 

 holds this position in common with the nar- 

 rowest of the orthodox. Yet there are 

 many divines who see that the whole course 

 of theology in this respect has been 

 wrong, and that, rightly viewed, every suc- 

 cessive step taken by Science, in conquering 

 the world to the laws of order, has only 

 strengthened and exalted the true view of 

 the Divine government of the world. 



Three Essays on Religion. By John Stu- 

 art Mill. 302 pp. Price, $2.50. New 

 York : Henry Holt & Co. 



The three elaborate essays which con- 

 stitute this work are on the following sub- 

 jects: I. -Nature; II. Utility of Religion; 

 III. Theism. The first two of these were 

 written some twenty years ago, the last 

 within half a dozen years ; but Miss Taylor, 

 the editor, in her "Introductory Notice," 

 says that Mr. Mill intended to publish the 

 essay on Nature one of the first written 

 in 1873. From this it would appear that 

 she views upon religious subjects which Mr. 



Mill entertained a quarter of a century ago 

 were those that he continued to hold during 

 life ; indeed, Miss Taylor says that " it is cer- 

 tain that the author considered the opinions 

 expressed in these different essays as funda- 

 mentally consistent ; " and she adds, " It is 

 apparent that his manner of thinking had 

 undergone no substantial change." 



Now, whatever Mr. Mill wrote upon sub- 

 jects that had engaged his long and earnest 

 attention was always valuable and worthy 

 of thoughtful perusal ; and, certainly, his 

 reflections upon so universally important a 

 matter as religion are entitled to grave 

 consideration. And yet Mr. Mill's claim to 

 be heard rests only upon the broad pre- 

 sumptive ground of his acknowledged great- 

 ness as a thinker, and our interest to know 

 what he said is much the same as it would 

 be in the views of Plato, Averroes, or Kant. 

 For, as a thinker, Mr. Mill is already his- 

 toric historic not merely in the sense that 

 he is dead, but that he is separated from 

 the present by a great epoch of change in 

 the philosophic view of Nature, and as be- 

 longing to an old dispensation of thought. 

 As we have shown before, Mr. Mill virtually 

 antedated the scientific era. He was edu- 

 cated in the most despotic manner, and 

 with no more reference to science than if 

 that agency had not appeared in human 

 affairs. His whole discipline and mental 

 furniture, although thorough and full, were 

 on a method that had been perfected before 

 science arose; and it was natural, if not 

 inevitable, that his philosophic opinions on 

 the subject of Nature and religion should 

 have been in substantial harmony with the 

 old skeptical school. Many questions are 

 undoubtedly handled with originality and 

 power; but the standing-point from which 

 the whole subject is considered belongs to 

 the last century. 



That this stand-point has been greatly 

 altered within a few years, so as to give 

 new aspects to old religious problems, can 

 hardly be doubted. The doctrine of evolu- 

 tion, which has latterly come forward so 

 prominently, is not merely a theory of the 

 origin of animal diversities ; it is nothing 

 less than a philosophy of Nature, and gives 

 a new complexion to the great religious 

 questions in which the interpretation of Na- 

 ture is involved. Our space will not allow 



