EDITOR'S TABLE. 



409 



%tiitox r s gaM*. 



A VOICE FROM THE PULPIT. 



' \ITE called attention last month 

 V V to a weak attack on the doc- 

 trine of evolution by a certain Mr. 

 A. J. Smith, Superintendent of Pub- 

 lic Schools in the city of St. Paul. 

 The only thing which gave any con- 

 sequence to the deliverance in ques- 

 tion was that it was addressed to 

 a large gathering of public-scbool 

 teachers, who might possibly have 

 been unduly influenced in their ap- 

 preciation of it by the speaker's offi- 

 cial position. We are glad now to 

 learn that, very shortly after the pub- 

 lication of Superintendent Smith's 

 address, an excellent statement of 

 the true relation of the doctrine of 

 evolution to education was made in 

 one of the city pulpits by the Rev. 

 S. G. Smith, who did not boast, as 

 the superintendent had done, of hav- 

 ing made an exhaustive study of 

 the subject, but who, nevertheless, 

 showed that he had a grasp of it 

 which the other altogether lacked. 

 The Rev. Mr. Smith's discourse 

 would have merited attention wher- 

 ever it might have been delivered; 

 but, considered as a pulpit utterance, 

 it seems to us to possess a special and 

 very encouraging significance. We 

 need hardly say that the pulpit has 

 not always been friendly to broad 

 scientific views, but in this case it 

 has spoken with a candor, a breadth,, 

 and an intelligence which the lec- 

 ture platform can not do more than 

 equal, and which it would certainly 

 be too much to look for in all our 

 colleges. 



"The law of evolution," said the 

 reverend gentleman, ''is as universal 

 in its application as the law of gravi- 

 tation. It holds that in every realm 

 the simple tends to become complex, 



and that the complex is more stable 

 than the simple. Motion and mat- 

 ter have a history in which the sim- 

 ple and the indefinite take on variety 

 of organization and definiteness of 

 adaptation." This is a statement in 

 which the author of the Synthetic 

 Philosophy would probably have 

 very little change to suggest. Mr. 

 Smith does not, like so many who 

 discuss the subject in a superficial 

 manner, confound evolution with 

 Darwinism. Darwinism, he recog- 

 nizes, may, in its particular explana- 

 tions as to the origin of species and 

 the descent of life, be in error; but 

 evolution is universal in its scope, and 

 can only fail if it can be shown that 

 the fundamental postulates on which 

 it rests, such as the instability of the 

 homogeneous, the continuity of mo- 

 tion, the law of rhythm, etc., are not 

 to be depended on. Must a person 

 have made the circle of the sciences 

 and comprehended all knowledge 

 before he can reasonably profess a 

 belief in evolution ? No, says Mr. 

 Smith ; when the foundations of a 

 doctrine have been clearly laid, when 

 they have been tested by many dif- 

 ferent investigators from many dif- 

 ferent points of view, and when these, 

 almost without exception, affirm that 

 the doctrine is not only in harmony 

 with, but lends a new and deeper sig- 

 nificance to, the several orders of fact 

 with which they are individually 

 concerned, any person of ordinary in- 

 telligence is justified in considering 

 that doctrine as satisfactorily proved 

 and giving it his personal adhesion. 



What chiefly excited the ire of 

 Superintendent A. J. Smith was the 

 contention of evolutionists that the 

 modern child reflects the earlier 

 stages of human development. He 



