Such are some of the results of the work of the Association in two only of its Sections. We cannot go into further detail, and will conclude our references by a quotation from the lecture on Palæontology, given by Professor Huxley to an evening audience. "The whole fabric of Palæontology," he said, in summing up results, "is based upon two propositions: the first is, that fossils are the remains of animals and plants; and the second is, that the stratified rocks in which they are found are sedimentary deposits; and each of these propositions is founded upon the same axiom, that like effects imply like causes. If there is any cause competent to produce a fossil stem, or shell, or bone except a living being, then Palæontology has no foundation; if the stratification of the rocks is not the effect of such causes as at present produce stratification, we have no means of judging of the duration of past time, or of the order in which the forms of life have succeeded one another. But if these two propositions are granted, there is no escape, as it appears to me, from three very important conclusions. The first is, that living matter has existed upon the earth for a vast length of time, certainly for millions of years. The second is, that during this lapse of time the forms of living matter have undergone repeated changes, the effect of which has been that the animal and vegetable population at any one period of the earth's history contains species. which did not exist at some antecedent period, and which ceased to exist at some subsequent period. The third is, that in the case of many groups of mammals and some of reptiles, in which one type can be followed through a considerable extent of geological time, the series of different forms by which the type is represented at successive intervals of this time is exactly such as it would be if they had been produced by the gradual modification of the earliest form of the series. These are the facts of the history of the earth, guaranteed by as good evidence as any facts in civil history. At present these truths leave room for only two hypotheses. The first is, that in the course of the history of the earth innumerable species of animals and plants have come into existence independently of one another innumerable times. This of course implies either that spontaneous generation on the most astounding scale, and of animals such as horses and elephants, has been going on, as a natural process, through all the time recorded by the fossiliferous rocks; or it necessitates the belief in innumerable acts of creation repeated innumerable times. The other hypothesis is, that the successive species of animals and plants have arisen, the later by the gradual modification of the earlier. This is the hypothesis of evolution, and the palæontological discoveries of the last decade are so completely in accordance with the requirements of this hypothesis that if it had not existed the paleontologists would have had to invent it. I have always had a certain horror of presuming to set a limit upon the possibilities of things. Therefore I will not venture to say that it is impossible that the multitudinous species of animals and plants may have been produced separately one from the other by spontaneous generation; nor that it is impossible they should have been independently originated by an endless succession of miraculous creative acts. But I must confess that both these hypotheses strike me as so astoundingly improbable, so devoid of a shred of either scientific or traditional support, that even if there were no other evidence than that of palæontology in its favour I should feel compelled to adopt the hypothesis of evolution." We are glad to notice in this last meeting of the Association one thing of which the above extract serves as a fitting illustration—a modification of the dogmatic tone of our Scientists, and a clear endeavour throughout, and in the above instance markedly successful, to distinguish between hypothesis and fact. Nothing could be more satisfactory for all parties and desirable in the cause of truth than such a statement as Huxley here makes. Of course he states strongly his own opinion, which, also of course, he has a perfect right to do; but he does not confound that "hypothesis" with fact, and unmistakably declares that evolution is a hypothesis. Such a logical statement of the issue as this will do more for the cause of truth than all their scientific furor, dogmatism, and denunciation of other beliefs. There has been throughout, too, a closer adhesion to the idea of practical work in the thought and intention as well as in the words of the various speakers than in some recent meetings of the Association: we have had next to nothing of mere theory, but abundance of fruitful suggestion. This is also as it should be, and leaves in its train a most pleasing and gratifying result. The impetus which the Associa tion has in this way given to the amelioration of man's natural lot, and the furtherance of his physical wellbeing, can hardly be overestimated, and certainly does not deserve to be slighted or ignored. We rejoice in the work which they do it is eminently the work of the time; and in it, moreover, they are laying the foundation, on the natural plane, of that grand human dwelling-place whose superstructure other and more spiritual hands will be required and prepared to THOMAS CHild. raise. MIRACLES. THE study which has been brought to bear upon the New Testament, and which has resulted in the Revised English Version, has shed light on the question of miracles. The results are so well stated by Dr. Alex. Roberts in his " 'Companion to the Revised Version (p. 127) that I can do no better than quote them : "The word onμeîov, most frequently rendered 'miracle' or 'miracles,' occurs seventeen times in St. John's Gospel, thirteen times in St. Matthew, eleven times in St. Luke, and seven times in St. Mark. Now it is a curious fact that, while this word is rendered 'miracle' or 'miracles' thirteen times in St. John's Gospel, that rendering is not once given it in the other Gospels, except at Luke xxiii. 8. In every other passage it is translated sign, or signs; and such is the rendering which should have been preserved throughout. The word repas, which properly means 'miracles,' i.e. marvellous works, occurs but three times in the Gospels-Matt. xxiv. 24; Mark xiii. 22; John iv. 48; and NEVER with reference to the works which Christ performed. It is therefore to be regretted that a word which simply suggests what is strange or wonderful should have such prominence assigned to it in connection with the works of Christ. These were signs' rather than 'miracles,' signs of the Divine Presence fitted to impress the hearts of men, and not thaumaturgic acts which might excite only marvelling or admiration. The other word, dúvaμis, sometimes translated 'miracle,' as at Mark ix. 39, does not occur in St. John's Gospel at all. It is usually rendered mighty work,' and this translation generally answers well, as at chap. vi. 5, etc. But it must be observed that at Matt. xiv. 2 and Mark vi. 14, the Authorized Version in incorrect, the proper translation being, 'these powers work in Him.' 6 To the New Churchman there is a further inference to be gathered from these facts. The word sign carries his mind at once to those signs which are so frequently described by Swedenborg as being. given in the spiritual world. The idea that these signs were mainly spiritual phenomena, exactly suited to the states of those to whom they were first given, gathers much force from a close analysis of the letter of the Word. As to Inspiration, I think we should have definite ideas. That Inspiration of the Word of God which involves the giving to mankind of continuous truths which have the relation of end, cause, and effect, must be special and limited if the New Church philosophy has any foundation in fact. But the term Inspiration is so often used to describe the effect of the Divine Spirit in guiding men of genius in all ages, that some confusion is likely to arise if this idea is sub stituted for the former one. J. W. T. Miscellaneous. To the General Conference of the New Church in Great Britain. PHILADELPHIA, July 25, 1881. DEAR BRETHREN,-Having enjoyed the great privilege and pleasure of meeting with you for a few years. past, of being instructed by your deliberations, and strengthened by communion with so many earnest and intelligent workers in the New Church, I feel moved to visit you by letter, as I cannot do it in person, and gain what pleasure and profit I can from renewing and strengthening the bonds of brotherhood in the only way possible to me at the present time. I am the more desirous of doing this now, because there will be no official communication from the General Convention to your Conference the present year. This omission is not caused by any want of interest in the progress of the Church in Great Britain, of sympathy with our brethren who live there, or of appreciation of the value of the closest bonds of union with them. It is a rule of our Convention that all address to other bodies of the Church shall be referred to the Convention for its sanction. Owing to the fact that our Convention met some weeks earlier than usual, there was not time to have a reply to your address by the Rev. Mr. Presland prepared before the meeting of the Convention. There was an effort made to overcome this difficulty by having an address prepared and referred to the Executive Committee; but the members of that committee reside at such great distances from one another, that it was difficult to submit an address to their consideration and get their approval in time for the meeting of the Conference. I sincerely hope that in future nothing will occur to prevent the regular interchange of communications between the General Convention and the General Conference. As the official communication has failed for the above reasons, I will do what I can as an individual to supply its place. It is always interesting, instructive, and helpful to learn what our brethren are doing, what measures they use, and what success they meet with in building up the Lord's kingdom upon the earth. We are all dependent upon others, and through them upon the Lord, for all our affection, knowledge, and spiritual power. Every human being is like a tree. As the tree sends down its roots into the earth, and extends them in various directions to obtain sustenance for its growth, so the roots of our being, which are truths, extend to individuals and societies in this world and the spiritual world for our spiritual sustenance; and the wider, the more various and extensive, the roots of our beings extend to others, the more various and abundant will be our means of spiritual growth. In this way we are richly rewarded for a wide and various extension of our thoughts and affections to others, not only by the pleasure we derive from such intercourse, but by a permanent gain in the means of spiritual growth. We become inserted into societies, and enriched by the variety of life they communicate. It is a part of wisdom, therefore, to seek for such extension, and by receiving and giving life to make the bonds of union as strong and capacious for the reciprocal flow of life as possible. You are doubtless familiar with the general state of the Church in America and the condition of our work. I do not know that there is anything new and particularly interesting to relate. There is progress in the most of our Societies, and the efforts and means of propagating our doctrines are increasing. In some cases it is more marked than others. Societies, like individuals, have their summer and winter, and the winter may be just as useful to their growth as the summer. There are many promising indications of increase in spiritual life. One of these signs, which I regard as particularly hopeful, is the dissatisfaction, which is deeper and wider than ever before, with our present attainments in spiritual knowledge and life. Why do not those who have the light of genuine, Divine truth live more heavenly lives? is a question which is asked with much more frequency and earnestness than ever before. Why are we so worldly? why so little consecration to the Lord and His kingdom? why do not our children grow up in the Church and manifest a deeper interest in its work and worship? These are questions which ministers and laymen are asking, and they are the effect of a deeper spiritual life. As we draw nearer to heaven and the Lord, our surprise will increase that we are so far from them. As we discover the real value of heavenly good by blessed experience, we shall wonder that we possess so little of it, and that we prize so highly the treasures laid up upon the earth, and we see more clearly the wisdom of using all our natural possessions of time, money, knowledge, and social influence as instruments of giving and gaining heavenly life. By It seems to me, therefore, to be one of the most encouraging signs of spiritual growth that we are dissatisfied with our present attainments. the aid of new light we see our evils more clearly, and they appear more hideous and repulsive. I think there is also an increasing desire to study our doctrines more thoroughly and enter more minutely into their particulars. When we see that the writings of the New Church contain the laws of spiritual life, teach us the value of that life, and show us how we can obtain it, they become more precious to us. At first we value them more as a corrective of false doctrine, and for a time we may be content with their service in saving us from error. But that is only a negative service. If we have any spiritual life, we shall begin to feel the need of some positive attainments. We shall be filled with a heavenly hunger and thirst. Then we shall desire to know truth for the new and larger good we can gain by it. We shall seek it as for hid treasure. The time must come when men will study spiritual truth with the same interest and for the same relative purpose that they now study natural truth; and that is, not merely to disprove false notions, not merely for the knowledge itself, but for the good they can gain by means of it. When this state prevails, and as it prevails, there will be a strong desire to enter into the particulars of spiritual truth, because every new truth leads to a new good. They will seek for spiritual riches as they now seek for natural riches. Any indication of the approach of such a state is hopeful. It is a sure sign of spiritual progress. I think there are many sure indications that we are advancing into such a state. Surely the time must come when New Churchmen will regard it of more importance that their children should be thoroughly instructed in spiritual truth than in any of the natural sciences. Spiritual culture will be esteemed of far more value than the possession of any natural attainments; and Societies of the Church will regard it as a duty paramount to all others to make ample provision for such culture. They will regard it as the most important use they can render their children, and the richest legacy they can leave them, to provide the natural means for such a spiritual use. The time must come when our children will be the subjects of a spiritual nurture, by which their spiritual" wants will be provided for, and their spiritual faculties will be unfolden in true and harmonious order. As the spiritual world draws nearer to us its influences will become more dominant; we shall regard ourselves more as citizens of that world in which lies all our permanent interests and our eternal home. The spiritual man will assume his proper place as master, and the natural man and all material interests will be regarded as subordinate to him. When the spiritual man gains the supremacy the whole order of life will be changed. In our natural impatience we often think that our progress towards such a state of true order is slow; but the Church in its largest as well as in its smallest forms is a man, and consequently must be subject to all the laws of human growth. Its progress must therefore be a growth. It cannot be forced; it cannot be effected by the accumulation of numbers. cannot therefore be rapid. All organic changes must be comparatively slow. The New Church is not only a new doctrine, it is a new life; it is a It |