296 REY. H. J. CLARKE 
with the term “ Evolution”? Is it his opinion that they are one and the 
same thing? If so, I must certainly say I shall have to give up all thoughts 
of Evolution as I have previously held them. If I understand it rightly, 
Evolution, roughly speaking, would be the evolving of one animal from an- 
other, throughout the whole series, from those of the most simple origin up 
to the most complex types. If I am right, Creation is the production 
of beings by a definite act of the Creator. Of course, I may have mis- 
understood both the terms themselves and the view taken by the author of 
the paper ; but I should like him to say whether I am to take for granted 
or how I am to construe the passage in section 12, where he says :—‘‘ This, 
when distinguished as a specific force, is named volitional ; when its 
efficacy is characterised it is known as creative; while if, in contemplation 
of its effects, regard be had to a hidden fund of corresponding resources, the 
adjective which suggests itself is evolutional.” Beyond this, may I ask one 
more question? As I understand Evolution, it professes to give a reasonable 
explanation of the different forms of life upon earth. In section 18 we are 
told that there is an absence of evidence connecting the highest being on 
earth—man—with the highest type of the lower animals, and in this the 
author is not in any way abstruse. He says :—“It is not one connecting 
link that we miss between the brute and the man, namely between the most 
advanced of the lower races of animals now existing and that race which 
towers and rules over all,—it is not two or three, but thousands, or myriads, 
or millions.” If that be the case, I hope the author will pardon me if I say 
that in the absence of any proof, and in the presence of so complete a breach 
between two of what are usually termed allied forms, I cannot accept Evolu- 
tion in the same sense as Creation, nor can I accept Evolution as in any way 
proved. 
Mr. J. Hassetu.—I desire to ask one question. I shall not attempt to 
go into the whole paper, as I have not had time to read it before coming 
here to-night, and it is one requiring deep consideration. But after what 
has been said by others I may say that I am one of those who do not in any 
way believe in Evolution, as it is popularly put before us ; and I should like 
to point out to those who reject the view that man is a separate creation, and 
hold that he is evolved out of a lower form of animal life, that the inevitable 
result of accepting such a theory is already claimed by some well-known 
Evolutionists themselves to involve the rejection of Christianity, if not 
of Theism altogether. For instance, one of their number, Mr. Grant 
Allen, speaks thus :— While men believed in the special and separate 
creation of their own species, they could also believe that the Creator 
had endowed each human being with an immortal soul; but when 
the ascending line from the Amceba to man is seen to be unbroken * it is 
difficult to concede immortality to ourselves without conceding it also to 
every plant and every animal... . A consistent and logical acceptance of 
* The “links” have not yet been found.—Ep., 
