;iI2 EVOLUTION AND SOCIAL PROGRESS 



Barrell, professor of structural geology in Yale 

 College, thus traces their history : 



During the first half of the nineteenth century the nebular 

 hypothesis was accepted by astronomers almost without question, 

 but during the second half many serious dynamical objections 

 were developed and a process of modifications began [a series 

 of new hypotheses] until not much remains of the original con- 

 ception of Laplace. ... A hypothesis to gain scientific credence 

 must emerge successfully from the test of observed facts and 

 mathematical theory. The nebular hypothesis has not done 

 so. It is on the defensive and has lost standing during the 

 past generation. 4 



These reflections bring home with new force 

 the wise warning given to Catholics by the eminent 

 Cardinal Newman: 



It has seemed to me very undignified for a Catholic to com- 

 mit himself to the work of chasing what might turn out to be 

 phantoms, and, in behalf of some special objections, to be in- 

 genious in devising a theory, which, before it was completed 

 might have to give place to some theory newer still, from the 

 fact that those former objections had already come to naught 

 under the uprising of others. 5 



To the above admirable passage Sir Bertram 

 Windle adjoins the reply of Clerk Maxwell, the 

 originator of the electro-magnetic theory of light. 

 When consulted by Bishop Ellicott, in 1876, re- 

 garding the mention of light in Genesis previous 

 to the first mention of the sun, Maxwell pru- 

 dently counseled the Bishop against pinning any 

 text of Scripture to a conjectural hypothesis, even 



4 "The Evolution of the Earth." Chapter I, "The Origin of 

 the Earth," by Joseph Barrell, pp. n, 12. 

 "Apologia." 



