THE RELATION OF EVOLUTION TO MATERIALISM 51 
Christians—i.e., that we were made by a process of evolution. Observe 
that this latter combines and reconciles the other two, and is thus the 
more rational and philosophical. Now, there are also three exactly 
corresponding theories concerning the origin of species. The first is 
that of many pious persons and many intelligent clergymen, who say 
that species were made at once by the Divine hand without natural 
process. ‘The second is that of the materialists, who say that species 
were not made at all, they were derived, “they growed.” The third 
is that of the theistic evolutionists, who think that they were created 
by a process of evolution—who believe that making is not incon- 
sistent with growing. The one asserts the divine agency, but 
denies natural process; the second asserts the natural process, but 
denies divine agency; the third asserts divine agency by natural process. 
Of the first two, observe, both are right and both wrong; each view is 
right in what it asserts, and wrong in what it denies—each is right 
from its own point of view, but wrong in excluding the other point 
of view. The third is the only true rational solution, for it includes, 
combines, and reconciles the other two; showing wherein each is right 
and wherein wrong. It is the combination of the two partial truths, 
and the elimination of the partial errors. But let us not fail to do 
perfect justice. The first two views of origin, whether of the indi- 
vidual or of the species, are indeed both partly wrong as well ds 
partly right; but the view of the pious child and of the Christian con- 
tains by far the more essential truth. Of the two sides of the shield, 
theirs is at least the whiter and more beautiful. 
But, alas! the great bar to a speedy settlement of this question and 
the adoption of a rational philosophy is not in the head, but in the 
heart—is not in the reason, but in pride of opinion, self-conceit, 
dogmatism. The rarest of all gifts is a truly tolerant, rational spirit. 
In all our gettings let us strive to get this, for it alone is true wisdom. 
But we must not imagine that all the dogmatism is on one side, and 
that the theological. Many seem to think that theology has a“ pre- 
emptive right” to dogmatism. If so, then modern materialistic science 
has ‘‘jumped the claim.”’ Dogmatism has its roots deep-bedded in the 
human heart. It showed itself first in the domain of theology, because 
there was the seat of power. In modern times it has gone over to the 
side of science, because here now is the place of power and fashion. 
There are two dogmatisms, both equally opposed to the true rational 
spirit, viz., the old theological and the new scientific. The old clings 
fondly to old things, only because they are old; the new grasps eagerly 
