CHAPTER XII.
THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION.
Prejudiced opinions on the subject.--"Creation" sometimes denied from prejudice .-- -The unknowable .-- Mr.Herbert Spencer's objections to theism; to creation .-- Meanings of term "creation."-- Confusion from not distinguishing between "primary" and "derivative" creation .-- Mr.
Darwin's objections .-- Bearing of Christianity on the theory of evolution .-- Supposed opposition, the result of a misconception .-- Theological authority not opposed to evolution .-- St.
Augustin .-- St.Thomas Aquinas .-- Certain consequences of want of flexibility of mind .-- Reason and imagination .-- The first cause and demonstration .-- Parallel between Christianity and natural theology .-- What evolution of species is .-- Professor Agassiz .-- Innate powers must be recognized .-- Bearing of evolution on religious belief .-- Professor Huxley .-- Professor Owen .-- Mr.Wallace .-- Mr.
Darwin .-- _A priori_ conception of Divine action .-- Origin of man .-- Absolute creation and dogma .-- Mr.Wallace's view .-- A supernatural origin for man's body not necessary .-- Two orders of being in man .-- Two modes of origin .-- Harmony of the physical, hyperphysical, and supernatural .-- Reconciliation of science and religion as regards evolution .-- Conclusion.
The special "Darwinian Theory" and that of an evolutionary process neither excessively minute nor fortuitous, having now been considered, it is time to turn to the important question, whether both or either of these conceptions may have any bearing, and if any, what, upon Christian belief?
Some readers will consider such an inquiry to be a work of supererogation.
Seeing clearly themselves the absurdity of prevalent popular views, and the shallowness of popular objections, they may be impatient of any discussion, on the subject.

But it is submitted that there are many minds worthy {244} of the highest esteem and of every consideration, which have regarded the subject hitherto almost exclusively from one point of view; that there are some persons who are opposed to the progress (in their own minds or in that of their children or dependents) of physical scientific truth--the natural revelation--through a mistaken estimate of its religious bearings, while there are others who are zealous in its promotion from a precisely similar error.

For the sake of both these then the Author may perhaps be pardoned for entering slightly on very elementary matters relating to the question, whether evolution or Darwinism have any, and if any, what, bearing on theology?
There are at least two classes of men who will certainly assert that they have a very important and highly significant bearing upon it.
One of these classes consists of persons zealous for religion indeed, but who identify orthodoxy with their own private interpretation of Scripture or with narrow opinions in which they have been brought up--opinions doubtless widely spread, but at the same time destitute of any distinct and authoritative sanction on the part of the Christian Church.
The other class is made up of men hostile to religion, and who are glad to make use of any and every argument which they think may possibly be available against it.
Some individuals within this latter class may not believe in the existence of God, but may yet abstain from publicly avowing this absence of belief, contenting themselves with denials of "creation" and "design," though these denials are really consequences of their attitude of mind respecting the most important and fundamental of all beliefs.
Without a distinct belief in a personal God it is impossible to have any religion worthy of the name, and no one can at the same time accept the Christian religion and deny the dogma of creation.

[Page 245] "I believe in God," "the Creator of Heaven and Earth," the very first clauses of the Apostles' Creed, formally commit those who accept them to the assertion of this belief.

If, therefore, any theory of physical science really conflicts with such an authoritative statement, its importance to Christians is unquestionable.
As, however, "creation" forms a part of "revelation," and as "revelation" appeals for its acceptance to "reason" which has to prepare a basis for it by an intelligent acceptance of theism on _purely rational grounds_, it is necessary to start with a few words as to the reasonableness of belief in God, which indeed are less superfluous than some readers may perhaps imagine; "a few words," because this is not the place where the argument can be drawn out, but only one or two hints given in reply to certain modern objections.
No better example perhaps can be taken, as a type of these objections, than a passage in Mr.Herbert Spencer's First Principles.[246] This author constantly speaks of the "ultimate cause of things" as "the Unknowable," a term singularly unfortunate, and as Mr.James Martineau has pointed out,[247] even self-contradictory: for that entity, the knowledge of {246} the existence of which presses itself ever more and more upon the cultivated intellect, cannot be the unknown, still less _the unknowable_, because we certainly know it, in that we know for certain that it exists.
Nay more, to predicate incognoscibility of it, is even a certain knowledge of the mode of its existence.