265 
Professor Tyndall and his unknown physician must bear all the 
consequences of this revolting and mistaken movement. It is 
impossible to conceive anything more dreadful than the pro- 
position made by these men, founded as it is upon ignorance of 
the meaning, the objects, and the value of the greatest of all 
human blessings. 
59. If not the direct result of Darwinism, which I believe it 
to be, this discussion displays at least the utter want of religious 
feelings among its disciples. Is man to dictate to God? Is 
man to put God upon his trial ? Is the great Omnipotent to 
be placed in parallelism with the self-glorifying and pre- 
sumptuous aspirations of scepticism ? Alas for the day when 
the Christian should be deprived of the privilege of praying to 
his God ! It has beien well remarked by the editor of the 
Sunday Magazine for October, 1872, “There is something very 
melancholy in the endeavour, in the name of science, to deprive 
us of one of our highest privileges. If the views of Tyndall 
and Galton should be established, the awful dream of John 
Paul Pichter would become nearly a reality. f I wandered to 
the farthest verge of creation, and there I saw a socket where 
an eye should have been, and I heard the shriek of a fatherless 
world / i 
60. In Fraser’s Magazine for April, 1872, there is a paper 
under the signature of L. S., entitled “Darwinism and Divinity.” 
The writer of the article holds the opinion that the doctrine 
of evolution should appear harmless, because “Every sincere 
believer ought to hold that religion depends upon certain 
instincts, whose existence cannot be explained away by any 
possible account of the mode by which they came into existence.” 
61. This is a good example of the manner in which religion 
is treated by the disciples of Darwin. Of course it suits the 
doctrine to argue that religion depends upon “ certain instincts.” 
Having thus begged the question, the writer proceeds : — “ A 
little more straining of a few phrases which have proved them- 
selves sufficiently elastic, and the first obvious difficulty may be 
removed. The first chapter of Genesis has survived Sir Charles 
Lyell; it may be stretched sufficiently to include Mr. Darwin.” 
62. But before this can be done, the writer considers that 
“ a certain change is being brought about by the application 
of that method of which Darwinism is at present the most 
conspicuous example. Possibly the change may be of even 
greater importance. Certainly it is of far too great importance 
to be more than dimly indicated here. Briefly, it may be 
described as the substitution of belief in gradual evolution for 
a belief in spasmodic action and occasional outbursts of creative 
energy : of the acceptance of the corollary that we must seek 
