« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
A. On the Validity of the Argument from Design,
? 27 227 2 28
28 ? 29 2 35 247
NOTES AND REFERENCES,
THE THREE BARRIERS.
1. Thoughtful working men of the north of Scotland, of whom not a few are here to-night, will not be slow to feel, with the present speaker, how much has been lost to the subject-matter of this address in the loss of one who commenced his memorable career in the north of Scotland as a working man. On first glancing over Mr. Darwin's pages, I could not help saying to myself, — What a pity Hugh Miller is dead! It was easy to see that this, in its patient ingenuity and probable influence, was no common book; and as natural to reflect that, had he been alive, it would have been met and sifted to the core by no common man. Of all our contemporaries, working men of the north, it was one who rose from your ranks--one whose hands were horny with hard mechanic toilthat was best fitted to grapple with this special task; and to render that crowning service
to the exposition of the harmony between Science and Faith for which all would have instinctively turned to him. But the contest has again come, and this champion is missing. We shall have no sequel from that pen, unrivalled “in its combination of wastery of detail with felicity of treatment, to the legacy left us in the “Testimony of the Rocks," and the "Footprints of the Creator."
2. Not that there are not now living in this land men amply equipped to meet those shapes of scepticism which are the special danger of the present day. A genius of the order to which Hugh Miller belonged is not, indeed, born twice in a century. But Scotland is still worthily represented in the study of the Creative and Providential record. 1 So, too, in the south, one great English seat of learning counts among her most honoured names a name not unknown to the unknown author of the “Vestiges ;” and has likewise arrayed, in “Indications of the Creator,” her profoundest knowledge and her most masterly faculty in league against the dreams of pantheistic development. In days when a voice from Oxford, of ominous strangeness, l. cakes haste to hail a predicted “revolution of opinion in favour of the self-evolving powers of nature.” 2 Cambridge “owes