按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
advance upon limitation of attention； upon the selection out of the whole content of consciousness of that part or aspect which is measurable by the method of the science。 Accordingly there is a science of life which rightly displays the unity underlying all its manifestations。 But there is another view of life； equally valid； and practically sometimes more important； which recognises the immediate and lasting effect of crisis； difference； and revolution。 Our ardour for the demonstration of uniformity of process and of minute continuous change needs to be balanced by a recognition of the catastrophic element in experience； and also by a recognition of the exceptional significance for us of events which may be perfectly regular from an impersonal point of view。
An exorbitant jealousy of miracle； revelation； and ultimate moral distinctions has been imported from evolutionary science into religious thought。 And it has been a damaging influence； because it has taken men's attention from facts； and fixed them upon theories。
II。
With this acknowledgment of important drawbacks； requiring many words for their proper description； I proceed to indicate certain results of Darwin's doctrine which I believe to be in the long run wholly beneficial to Christian thought。 These are：
The encouragement in theology of that evolutionary method of observation and study； which has shaped all modern research：
The recoil of Christian apologetics towards the ground of religious experience； a recoil produced by the pressure of scientific criticism upon other supports of faith：
The restatement； or the recovery of ancient forms of statement； of the doctrines of Creation and of divine Design in Nature； consequent upon the discussion of evolution and of natural selection as its guiding factor。
（1） The first of these is quite possibly the most important of all。 It was well defined in a notable paper read by Dr Gore； now Bishop of Birmingham； to the Church Congress at Shrewsbury in 1896。 We have learnt a new caution both in ascribing and in denying significance to items of evidence； in utterance or in event。 There has been； as in art； a study of values； which secures perspective and solidity in our representation of facts。 On the one hand； a given utterance or event cannot be drawn into evidence as if all items were of equal consequence； like sovereigns in a bag。 The question whence and whither must be asked； and the particular thing measured as part of a series。 Thus measured it is not less truly important； but it may be important in a lower degree。 On the other hand； and for exactly the same reason； nothing that is real is unimportant。 The 〃failures〃 are not mere mistakes。 We see them； in St Augustine's words； as 〃scholar's faults which men praise in hope of fruit。〃
We cannot safely trace the origin of the evolutionistic method to the influence of natural science。 The view is tenable that theology led the way。 Probably this is a case of alternate and reciprocal debt。 Quite certainly the evolutionist method in theology； in Christian history； and in the estimate of scripture； has received vast reinforcement from biology； in which evolution has been the ever present and ever victorious conception。
（2） The second effect named is the new willingness of Christian thinkers to take definite account of religious experience。 This is related to Darwin through the general pressure upon religious faith of scientific criticism。 The great advance of our knowledge of organisms has been an important element in the general advance of science。 It has acted； by the varied requirements of the theory of organisms； upon all other branches of natural inquiry； and it held for a long time that leading place in public attention which is now occupied by speculative physics。 Consequently it contributed largely to our present estimation of science as the supreme judge in all matters of inquiry （F。R。 Tennant： 〃The Being of God in the light of Physical Science〃； in 〃Essays on some theological questions of the day〃。 London； 1905。）； to the supposed destruction of mystery and the disparagement of metaphysic which marked the last age； as well as to the just recommendation of scientific method in branches of learning where the direct acquisitions of natural science had no place。
Besides this； the new application of the idea of law and mechanical regularity to the organic world seemed to rob faith of a kind of refuge。 The romantics had； as Berthelot （〃Evolutionisme et Platonisme〃； pages 45； 46； 47。 Paris； 1908。） shows； appealed to life to redress the judgments drawn from mechanism。 Now； in Spencer； evolution gave us a vitalist mechanic or mechanical vitalism； and the appeal seemed cut off。 We may return to this point later when we consider evolution； at present I only endeavour to indicate that general pressure of scientific criticism which drove men of faith to seek the grounds of reassurance in a science of their own； in a method of experiment； of observation； of hypothesis checked by known facts。 It is impossible for me to do more than glance across the threshold of this subject。 But it is necessary to say that the method is in an elementary stage of revival。 The imposing success that belongs to natural science is absent： we fall short of the unchallengeable unanimity of the Biologists on fundamentals。 The experimental method with its sure repetitions cannot be applied to our subject…matter。 But we have something like the observational method of palaeontology and geographical distribution； and in biology there are still men who think that the large examination of varieties by way of geography and the search of strata is as truly scientific； uses as genuinely the logical method of difference； and is as fruitful in sure conclusions as the quasi…chemical analysis of Mendelian laboratory work； of which last I desire to express my humble admiration。 Religion also has its observational work in the larger and possibly more arduous manner。
But the scientific work in religion makes its way through difficulties and dangers。 We are far from having found the formula of its combination with the historical elements of our apologetic。 It is exposed； therefore； to a damaging fire not only from unspiritualist psychology and pathology but also from the side of scholastic dogma。 It is hard to admit on equal terms a partner to the old undivided rule of books and learning。 With Charles Lamb； we cry in some distress； 〃must knowledge come to me； if it come at all； by some awkward experiment of intuition； and no longer by this familiar process of reading？〃 （〃Essays of Elia〃； 〃New Year's Eve〃； page 41； Ainger's edition。 London； 1899。） and we are answered that the old process has an imperishable value； only we have not yet made clear its connection with other contributions。 And all the work is young； liable to be drawn into unprofitable excursions； side…tracked by self…deceit and pretence； and it fatally attracts； like the older mysticism； the curiosity and the expository powers of those least in sympathy with it； ready writers who； with all the air of extended research； have been content with narrow grounds for induction。 There is a danger； besides； which accompanies even the most genuine work of this science and must be provided against by all its serious students。 I mean the danger of unbalanced introspection both for individuals and for societies； of a preoccupation comparable to our modern social preoccupation with bodily health； of reflection upon mental states not accompanied by exercise and growth of the mental powers； the danger of contemplating will and neglecting work； of analysing conviction and not criticising evidence。
Still； in spite of dangers and mistakes； the work remains full of hopeful indications； and； in the best examples （Such an example is given in Baron F。 von Hugel's recently finished book； the result of thirty years' research： 〃The Mystical Element of Religion； as studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa and her Friends〃。 London； 1908。）； it is truly scientific in its determination to know the very truth； to tell what we think； not what we think we ought to think。 （G。 Tyrrell； in 〃Mediaevalism〃； has a chapter which is full of the important MORAL element in a scientific attitude。 〃The only infallible guardian of truth is the spirit of truthfulness。〃 〃Mediaevalism〃 page 182； London； 1908。）； truly scientific in its employment of hypothesis and verification； and in growing conviction of the reality of its subject…matter through the repeated victories of a mastery which advances； like science； in the Baconian road of obedience。 It is reasonable to hope that progress in this respect will be more rapid and sure when religious study enlists more men affected by scientific desire and endowed with scientific capacity。
The class of investigating minds is a small one； possibly even smaller than that of reflecting minds。 Very few persons at any period are able to find out anything whatever。 There are few observers； few discoverers； few who even wish to discover truth。 In how many societies the problems of philology which face every person who speaks English are left unattempted！ And if the inquiring or the successfully inquiring