614 Analyses of Books. [October, 
brought in a cart to be hunted by the buckhounds of a certain 
illustrious lady. 
The Index. Vol. V. New Series, No. 6. 
This paper, whose praise is not “ in all the churches,” has been 
forwarded to us with especial reference to an essay entitled the 
“ Religious Confession of an Evolutionist,” by Charles Froebel. 
This memoir is not exadtly what we should have anticipated 
from the title. The writer discusses, calmly and thoughtfully, 
the “ true relation of religion to science, metaphysics, and 
aesthetics in human nature.” He recognises four fundamental 
phases of psychical life Religion, the infinite synthetical 
phase ; Metaphysics, the infinite analytical phase ; Aesthetics, 
the finite synthetical phase ; and Science, the finite analytical 
phase.” Each of these phases, we learn, may evidently appear 
either in a receptive or expressive mood. 
In a following sedtion the author examines the “ duties of 
Religion and Science.” We transcribe the following passage 
as illustrative of the author’s point of view : — “ For just so long 
as she (Religion) endeavours indiscriminately to maintain pos- 
sessions to which she has no title, as well as those to which she 
has, her efforts will be so enfeebled by the extent of the psychical 
territories she seeks to control that she will find herself despoiled 
of everything, till she is poor indeed, — in fadt, no religion at 
all, but the mere dethroned claimant of a metaphysically-garri- 
soned dependency of Science. To avoid this disaster, Religion 
must acknowledge her limitations. She must admit that while 
she claims as her legitimate inheritance that region which 
Science terms the ‘ unknowable,’ yet the forms dwelling in this 
region are for her no more knowable than for Science. She 
must acknowledge that on this field not Science only, but she as 
well is agnostic, — unable to know, b or it is in the form of 
belief, and not in that knowledge, that she must and can main- 
tain her rights. To the charge of Science ‘ You do not know ! ’ 
she must reply ‘ My cognition springs from sources of higher 
authority : I believe ! ’ When Science insists that she has no 
tangible reasons for her belief, she must answer that she has 
more tangible wants, affections, and desires. And when she 
occupies that position Religion will no longer be vulnerable. 
Like the wonderful shadowy form of some Oriental tale, the 
arrows of Science will pass through, her leaving no wound ; the 
sword of Reason may seem to cleave her, but she will stand 
there still unharmed, — the eternal, the mysterious, the all- 
beautiful ! 
Science, on the other hand, “ must demonstrate to the church- 
