THE DOGMA OF EVOLUTION 



which, without any violence to language, we may 

 call a theory of Evolution."^ He also quotes from 

 Cotterill as support for the evolutionary bias of 

 Augustine: "We observe that both the language it- 

 self and, yet more, Augustine's profound sense of the 

 impossibility of representing in the forms of finite 

 thought the operations of the infinite and eternal 

 Mind compelled this great theologian to look beyond 

 the mere letter of the inspired history of Creation, 

 and to indicate principles of interpretation which 

 supply by anticipation very valuable guidance, when 

 we compare other conclusions of modern science [the 

 evolutionary theory] with this teaching of Holy 

 Scripture."* Osborn's own opinion of Augustine is 

 that: "He thus sought a naturalistic interpretation 

 of the Mosaic record, or potential rather than special 

 creation, and taught that in the institution of Nature 

 we should not look for miracles but for the laws of 

 Nature."' 



3 Moore, Science and Faith. 



* Henry Cotterill, Does Science Aid Faith in Regard to Creation? 

 London, 1883. 



5 Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin, p. 72. As another example of 

 his inaccuracy, he says of John Scotus Erigena on p. 74 that he 

 "simply borrowed from Aristotle and Augustine." Now it is well- 

 known that Erigena was a neo-Platonist ; that he translated the pan- 

 theistic writings of Dionysius Areopagiticus ; that he advanced an 

 idealistic theory of atoms ; all of which are quite opposed to Aris- 

 totelianism. Osborn could have learned from so readily accessible 

 a source as Uberweg-Baumgarten that John Scotus was only in- 

 directly acquainted with the metaphysical teachings of Aristotle 

 although traces of Aristotelian influences are to be found in his 

 works. The suspicion might be entertained that Osborn has con- 

 fused John Scotus with Duns Scotus who flourished nearly five 

 centuries later. While Duns Scotus is known as the greatest critical 

 opponent of Thomas Aquinas, he was much more affected by Aris- 

 totle than was the earlier Scotus. 



1:903 



