EVOLUTION AND RELIGION 



of science because they phice the material life above 

 the spiritual. 



When either of these ruling passions becomes dom- 

 inant society suffers, for it is not wholesome to be gov- 

 erned exclusively by the reason or by the spirit. How 

 hard it is to preserve a just balance is shown by the 

 few periods when man has been able to prevent the 

 encroachment of the one or the other. Such may well 

 be called golden eras. No thoughtful person but will 

 admit that today we are basing our hopes of civiliza- 

 tion on the ability to devise a more rational scheme of 

 life which will obviate the inequalities of circum- 

 stances rather than on the submission of our desires 

 to a moral code whose only reward is indifference to 

 material success. 



Before any standards of criticism can be set, we 

 must have a fairly clear agreement as to what religion 

 and science are. All the Evolutionists are conspicu- 

 ous for their tendency to confuse religion with idola- 

 try. Spencer may say: "Religion, everywhere present 

 as a weft running through the warp of human history, 

 expresses some eternal fact."" But his criticism of 

 religion is not on the basis of its being an essential 

 and eternal verity. His presentation of religion is 

 always under the aspect that this fundamental verity 

 is degraded by error and superstition in practice. 

 This is pernicious, because he judges the benefits 



2 First Principles, p. 20. 



I 349 1 



