285 



of prayer, I think that they are answered in the quotation I gave from 

 an eminent clergyman, whose opinion upon the subject is exactly like that 

 formed by myself. The same speaker has also said, that I endeavoured to 

 show that because Darwinism was injurious to religious thought, I seemed to 

 infer that Darwinism is therefore not true, and he quoted geology as an 

 instance of being true although it had been denounced as being opposed to 

 Scripture. I do not think I am open to the first charge, as I endeavoured to 

 show that Darwinism had no foundation, and then, by pretty conclusive 

 evidence, to prove that it had been injurious to religious thought. "With 

 regard to another speaker's argument about Geology, I do not see that it 

 applies to my own. Geology may be reconciled by some with different 

 interpretations of Scripture, — Darwinism never can. Geology may seem to 

 some incompatible with the narrative of Moses ; but Darwinism affects 

 Religion and the existence of a God of any kind. The facts of Geology are 

 true and not irreconcilable with Scripture : Darwinism is not only untrue,— 

 but as a theory it is inconsistent and irreconcilable with Scripture ; while 

 some of the strongest arguments against it are furnished by Geology itself. 

 The Rev. Mr. Row mentioned he had heard that Mr. Darwin was a 

 Theist ; but he will grant that even the doctrines of a Theist cannot be 

 placed on the same level as those which teach of a Saviour. He added 

 that it was highly undesirable to represent every phase of science as opposed 

 to a belief in God. Certainly, and most assuredly I agree with him. But if 

 an unproved theory is raised by scientific men to a high pillar in the archives 

 of science — if we are told that this crude hypothesis is one of the three great 

 means by which science has hee7i advanced during the last twenty-five years 

 — and if such a crude unproved hypothesis strikes at the root of revelation 

 and religion — I am sure he will grant that it is desirable to expose both 

 the fallacies of the doctrine and its anti-religious teachings. The same 

 speaker seems to think that God may have created the world consistently 

 with evolution ; but he has to prove that such a belief is consistent and 

 true. 



The Meeting was then adjourned. 



VOL. VII, 



X 



