364 
Hew Testament, and believe it to be inspired, — you must also believe that 
in Adam all died, and that the unity of the human race is a thing essentially 
connected with the revealed doctrines of Christianity. (Hear, hear.) When 
a scientific man denies this, then I say that there is such a divergence be- 
tween scientific and theological opinion that it is necessary— I will not »y at 
once to tell that scientific man he is absolutely wrong in his conclusions— 
but at least to ask him to examine very narrowly the evidence upon which he 
makes that assertion. (Hear, hear.) Now, Professor Tyndall, m somewhat 
offensive terms — for I regard them as offensive terms to use towards a body 
of clergymen— has talked about the necessity of men having exact education 
in the exact sciences. I should like to know where you will find throughout 
Europe a body of men, taking them generally, who have had a more exact 
scientific training than the clergy of this country. (Hear, hear.) I will take 
the case of the University of Cambridge ; and I have no doubt that Dr. 
Irons will make the same plea on behalf of Oxford. When the French 
philosophers came over to this country and heard the answers given by 
our young men at Cambridge to the questions put to them in pure science, 
demonstrative and mathematical science, they wanted to know what became 
of ah these philosophers. I maintain that our clergy have been receiving 
an education far superior to that of any other class of men in this country 
—a more highly scientific education than our civil engineers, than the 
naval officers of the day, or the medical men of this country, and a more 
exact scientific education than even the scientific corps belonging to 
the British army. (Hear, hear.) These are open and notorious facts ; and 
it is absurd for men to come forward and say that, with such an educa- 
tion as this, the clergy are not capable of discussing scientific questions,, 
but that we are all trammelled and bound up by the Thirty-nine Articles. 
This is what Professor Huxley has virtually said. I do not know whether he 
intended to say so or not ; but, I ask, what else could he have meant ? The 
inference clearly is, that there are certain things which, in our own minds, we 
are obliged to admit,— which we cannot fail to admit,— but which we do not 
admit, because, for the sake of our daily bread, we have to subscribe to the 
Thirty-nine Articles. I ventured to call Professor Huxley’s attention to 
this ; and I must say that I do not think that those who were present at the 
meeting at Sion College considered the discussion to have been very fairly 
conducted. I wished to speak on the subject of the supposed discrepancy 
between the opinions held by men of science and by the clergy, and stated 
that the matter was not to be narrowed to the mere question of chronology. 
I said that none of the clergy ever maintained the infallibility of Arch- 
bishop Ush er’s chronology. I stated that, we were told, in offensive terms 
elsewhere, of a far greater discrepancy, namely, that there were persons who 
were called “ Adamites, pure and simple,” who believed that 6,000 years 
ago God created Adam, and that out of his rib He took Eve ; that the whole 
of his race were subsequently destroyed, with the exception of eight, who 
were saved in the Ark, and that that was called the “ Adamitic theory, pure 
and simple that nine-tenths of the public were taught this and believed it. 
