Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

earth, in such a latitude as that of Britain, as it falls now in India, and raised even the ocean to a temperature such as that of the Indian Ocean now, is the problem which we think astronomy, as generally understood, cannot solve. Even if we

grant the truth of the fundamental principles on which the calculations of the first philosophical astronomers of our time are based (and many competent thinkers will not grant so much), we are totally without anything in the popular teachings of the science that accounts in any degree for the facts of geology to which we refer.

In coming to a conclusion,* we are very forcibly reminded of a saying of one great man of science, which has been quoted and applied to a special idea by another of nearly equal standing. We direct attention to it, because it falls so signally short of the whole truth, and yet so faithfully represents a part of that truth. It fails to express that very thought which is of greatest moment as science stands at the present day. Agassiz has said, "that whenever a new and startling fact is brought to light in science, people first say, 'It is not true;' then, ' It is contrary to religion;' and, lastly, that 'Everybody knew it before.' Sir Charles Lyell quotes this in reference to the idea of the former existence of man with many extinct mammalia, holding that this, which he seems to regard as a "fact," has gone through all the three stages spoken of by Agassiz, at least so far as practical geologists are concerned. This idea of the coexistence of men with mammoths, it is important to observe is not a FACT, even if perfectly true. It is only an inference, at best, perhaps a theory by which certain facts are partially explained. So far as this matter of coexistence of man with extinct species of animals is concerned, we are not anxious as to what may prove to be its ultimate development. We refer to it at present only in connection with the idea of the three stages through which Agassiz said a new and startling fact passes. Such "facts" are often only theories, and we think we have given abundant evidence that the law of such things in geology calls for a fourth stage, which follows the three thus mentioned. In this fourth stage, "people" believe and teach the startling doctrine for a generation or two, and then find out that they have been all the while thoroughly deceived! Let any one pass carefully over the ground at which we have but glanced in this paper, and then let him say if the vast

* In preparing this paper I have left out of sight not a few of the speculations by which geology has come into conflict with the Bible, partly because. moderate limits had to be studied, and also because I was desirous not to repeat here what I have published already.

majority of ideas that have prevailed in the geological mind have not passed already through all these four stages.

What, then, are the relations of geological science, as popularly understood, to the Sacred Scriptures? They are the relations of that which in its fundamental principles has been changing, we might almost say, every hour of its history, to that which has passed down through thousands of years, running the gauntlet between the ranks of ten thousand times ten thousand assailants, remaining unchanged and even untouched to the present moment. So far as the facts and certain inferences of geology are concerned, they do not in any degree affect the Sacred Scriptures. The vast ages that have been made to occupy the minds of men when thinking of the world's history, and are now multiplied into endless millions of years, belong all to that conjectural thought which, as we have seen, is so perpetually changing. Few things are so fitted to humble us as an honest admission of our weakness under the influence of this. Men have thought that they were forced to remodel their ideas of the word of God, and even to abandon the belief of its Divine inspiration, by the force of that which turns out to be only a shifting dream! So we see the wisdom of those who have said to us, as they held back themselves, "Allow your Bibles to remain as they are; wait awhile, till it is seen what these speculations are worth. We have been too often misled by such conjecturings to be in any hurry to acknowledge their weight." And we see now our own well-meant folly, mingling with that of many others, in labouring to construct Scriptural theories that might harmonize with the passing visions of the scientific mind. As the men of science and the men of Scripture-the geologists and the theologians-awake together from their reveries, it seems as if it were to find, as we have already hinted, that the teachings of Moses regarding the world's uprearing are, after all, the grandly comprehensive truth-in very deed the Word of the Living God.

The CHAIRMAN.-It would be a mere idle form for me to ask you for a vote of thanks to Professor Kirk for the interesting and valuable paper he has just read. I am sure no one who has heard it found it too long; our only regret must be, that we had not the time to listen to, and Professor Kirk the physical power to have delivered, one double the length. There are few outsiders of Geology (as Professor Kirk has characterized himself) who have paid any attention to the subject, who will not feel that the Professor's greatest difficulty in writing his paper, must have been in selecting the few baseless theories he has spoken of this evening from among the many who

fallacies he might have exposed. We have heard much about the difficulties of Revelation in regard to the progress of physical science, and particularly that of Geology. Professor Kirk has given us a very fair exposition of the difficulties of Geology itself, in its claim to be even an approximation to an exact science. When I have been pressed to reconcile Geology with Revelation, I have always said, Let us wait till Geology becomes established as a sound science; then, and not till then, need the theologian care to seek to reconcile the Bible with Geology. While the Professor was reading his paper, I felt what a vast field of facts he had also left untouched, simply because he had so recently brought them before the world in his admirable little book, The Age of Man, geologically considered in its bearing on the Truths of the Bible. The theory of man's great antiquity as an inhabitant of the earth, so well received in high geological quarters, and already crumbling so rapidly before the accumulation of new facts, has been so completely refuted in that work, that the Professor seems altogether to have passed the subject by in his paper. In saying all this, I cast no reflection on the pursuit of the real science of Geology. What we do protest most earnestly against is the present habit of neglecting the sound method of Baconian induction,—not only in the science of Geology, but in so many other sciences, and attempting, by vague hypotheses, hastily built on a few facts, to get a short cut to truth, instead of pursuing the toilsome wearying work of collating and arranging facts irrespective of theory. When men had few facts to reason upon, such a process was excusable now it is utterly inexcusable. Great as may be the mass of facts known to modern geologists, it sinks into insignificance, compared with what must be accumulated before we can pretend to say we have gathered together the materials necessary to construct a true science of Geology. Not only, as Professor Kirk has pointed out, do we only know a mere superficial scraping as it were of the structure of the globe, but how little do we know even of that! How small a portion of the earth's surface has been geologically mapped, and even of that how little has been accurately done,-is admitted by our best geologists, who consider the geological map of our own country as falling far behind the present requirements of the science. When we reflect upon the grand and bold theories founded on knowledge so very superficial in respect to that which is necessary to found the science, we cannot be surprised that they should so rapidly fall into oblivion. Not only are the data wanting to construct Geology as a science, but we have to contend also with the difficulties of the problems it presents for solution. Its requirements are almost superhuman. To measure the chronology of given strata demands the skill of a profound mineralogist, and how many of these can we find among the ranks of the geologists? But to be a good mineralogist, implies also a considerable knowledge of chemistry and crystallography. You must have all this knowledge before you can interpret the nature of the material whose age you wish to determine. And even this will not carry you far. You must add to it a knowledge of the whole range of

* Jackson, Walford, and Hodder, 27, Paternoster Row, London.

natural history, of comparative anatomy, and comparative physiology, before you can interpret the paleontological facts of your strata. Then some other condition may call for all the powers of mathematics to solve some dynamical portion of your problem. And as if all this were not enough, Professor Kirk has shown us that we must ask the aid of the science of Electricity. There has been much boasting lately about the connection of the Old World with the New by the electric chain; and it is a feat of which science may well be proud. But the earth-currents and magnetic storms which affect that cable, give us a glimpse of the important part which electricity may play in the changing structure of the globe. When we consider the vast requirements, the vast amount of knowledge a man must bring to bear, in order rightly to interpret geological facts when he has discovered them, we need not wonder that blunders should be committed. We do not complain of the blunders, but we do complain of the tone of infallibility some men assume, and the absence of that modest humility so requisite in the pursuit of truth. Compare Geology with Astronomy, and you will find that the solution of the problems which has raised the latter almost to the rank of an exact science, is a far easier task than those with which the geologist is called upon to grapple. Professor Kirk has asked us, "What do you know about gravitation?" You cannot tell what it is. Newton did not profess to know. It was to him the name of an unknown force; though in his modest queries he seems to consider it not an inherent property of matter, but something external to it. What is the problem of the astronomer? It deals with the motion of bodies under the influence of this unknown force. Even here the imperfection of our mathematical analysis shows itself. We can only deal with three bodies at a time. And even then, were the problem not simplified by assuming the absence of an appreciable resisting medium, and many other favourable conditions I cannot now enter into, we could neither establish the lunar nor planetary theory. If such difficulties beset the establishment of the comparatively easy science of Physical Astronomy, surely modesty must be most becoming in dealing with the far more abstruse problems of Geology, a science in my estimation requiring not only a more gigantic intellect than that of Newton, but an age equal to the patriarchs of old, for the sound solution of some of its easiest problems. I need now only express our deepest obligations to Professor Kirk for the valuable instruction he has given us,

The Meeting then adjourned.

ORDINARY MEETING, JANUARY 21, 1867.

THE REV. WALTER MITCHELL, VICE-PRESIDENT, IN THE CHAIR. The minutes of the previous Meeting were read and confirmed.

The following paper was then read by Mr. Walter Brodie, in the absence of his father :

ON THE LESSONS TAUGHT US BY GEOLOGY IN REGARD TO THE NATURE OF GOD AND THE POSITION OF MAN. By the REV. JAMES BRODIE, M.A., Mem. Vict. Inst.

MANY

to entertain the opinion that there is a natural antagonism between the study of science and a simple and earnest belief in the Record of Revelation. Not a few of those who take an active part in our philosophical societies, and who speak on the subjects brought before them as men who are entitled to assume the voice of authority, treat the Mosaic narrative as they would treat an idle tale, and speak as if they deemed it inconsistent with the character and position of savants to pay any regard to the statements of Scripture. Some timid theologians, on the other hand, draw back from the study of science, as if the necessary result of engaging in it would be the awakening in their minds of doubt and perplexity, and shrink from an investigation into the laws which regulate the material creation, as if that would prove a first step to open infidelity.

As it is one of the special objects of the VICTORIA INSTITUTE to show that these views are altogether erroneous, and that the Work and the Word of God are in perfect harmony with each other, it is hoped that a few remarks on the lessons which geology teaches, in regard to the nature of God and the position of man, may be regarded as suitable to the times in which we live, and appropriate to the objects of the Society before which they are brought.

Without stopping to inquire whether the facts on which geologists rest their hypotheses have been ascertained with

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »