^ .^^ii^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 11.25 I^|Z8 |2.5 »^ 1^ 12.2 ^ li 1.4 111.6 Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 33 WIST MAIN STMIT WHSTM.N.Y. UStO (716) •73-4503 .'% CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Instituta for Hiatorical Microraproductiona Inathut Canadian da microraproductiona hiatoriquaa 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notes tachniquas at bibliographiquas Tha Inatituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagas in tha raproduction, or which may significantly changa tha usual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. B Colourad covers/ ^ ' Couvartura da coulaur rri Covers damaged/ D D D D Couverture endommagAe Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ et/ou pelliculAe I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured map&/ Cartes giographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or Illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en co^sleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intArieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte. mais, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont pas AtA film6es. Additional comments:/ Commentairas supplAmentaires: L'Institut a microfilm* la mailleur exemplaire qu'il lui a At* possible de se procurer. Les details da cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mAthode normale de filmage sont indiquAs ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ D D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagtes Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurias et/ou pelliculAes Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages dtcoiories. tacheties ou piquies Pages detached/ Pages ditachdes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary materif Comprend du materiel supplimentaire I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ r~| Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ |~~| Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ Only edition available/ Sfiuie Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure. etc., unt M film6es A nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X > r 22X 26X 30X 7 12X i6X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here he* been reproduced thenkt to the generosity of: NstionsI Librsry of Caneda L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A la gAn^rosit* de: BibliothAque nationale du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and iegibiiity of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^(meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. l\/laps. plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be (intireiy included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: ber Images euivantes ont At* reproduites svec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet* de Texemplaire film*, et en conformit* avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim*e sont filmte en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derni*re page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmte en commenpant par la premlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboies suivants apparattra sur la derni*re image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: ie symbols — »> signlfie "A SUIVRE", le symbols ▼ signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmAs d des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich*, il est film* * partir de i'angle sup*rieur gauche, de gauche * droite. et de haut en has. en pranant le nombre d'images n*cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m*thode. 1 2 3 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 6(A % -nv- The Right Revd., The Lord Bishop of Ontario. AGNOSTICISM. A I^ture Delivered in St. George's Hall, Kingston, on the Occasion of the Meeting of the Synod of the Diocese, June 12, i883> BY TILORDBISHOPOFONTMIO ; Printed by Request of the Synod. KINGSTON : 1883. AGNOSTICISM. ELIGION is at the present time con- fronted with a very real as well as a very subtle danger. It is not Chris- tianity, or any particular system of religion, that is attacked, but religion itself at its very root. This danger arises from the prevalence of Agnosti- cism, which is so subtly diffused that its influence is felt not only in the writings of Agnostics, but in conversation, magazines and newspapers. It occu- pies the attention and affects the minds of multi- tudes who dare not avow it. It has crept into our churches, and heads of families who are churchgoers and outwardly believers are at heart Agnostics. And there is a reason for this suppression of their real feelings. They have a lurking suspicion that it is not safe to abolish the present standard of right and wrong, until a substitute has been provided. They have misgivings regarding the expediency, or rather the cruelty, of consigning confiding wives and believing children to the tender mercies of Agnos- ticism. They have not as yet sufficient confidence ' in their negative creed to intrust to its keeping the reconstruction of society on the new basis, and pro- perty owners are not quite sure of the stability of things, should all the world become agnostic. They rightly think that it is bad enough though God is recognized as a fact, and they shrink from the possi> ble results of His being regarded as a myth. Mr. Labouchere tells us in his newspaper. Truth, that a majority of the British House of Commons are Agnostics. It may be so, but they have thrown out the Affirmation Bill, so that if they be Agnostics, they have not the courage of their convictions, per- haps from some such reasons as I have mentioned. This distrust of the practical results and working of Agnosticism is proved by the fact that some of its avowed champions write '" Tavor of attending public worship and conforming to religious usages, and their doing so, while it does not make us admire their morality, convinces us of their embarrassment. We cannot, therefore, estimate the real numbers of Agnostics by regarding as such those only who avow their disbelief, and I am justified, therefore, in call- ing Agnosticism a very subtle as well as a very real danger. But what is it in itself ? In trying to answer this question, let me remind you that the earliest heresy that arose in the first century was that of the Gnostics, or the knowing ones. They took their name from the Greek word yv&ct^, know- ledge or deeper wisdom. They professed to know more about God, creation and immortality than all other Christians. They had their day, but after a time passed away and were no more seen, at least <^.. ter a least under that title. The latest heresy, that of the Nineteenth Century, is the direct contradiction of that which prevailed in the first. It is that of the Agnostics, or the know-nothings. They not only profess that they know nothing about God or im- mortality, but they go farther and assert that noth- ing can possibly be known by the human mind on such subjects. They are not content to speak for themselves but for all the world besides. The in- stinct that tells uncivilized man that there is a God, goes for nothing, as being unscientific, while the rea- soning that tells civilized man that God is, goes for nothing too. The proofs from the marks of design in the universe do not prove a Designer, as Lucre- tius held long ago, and the manifest purpose which created natural' laws such as those discovered by Newton and Kepler is therefore discredited. In- stead of these proofs, the hypothesis is maintained that matter sorted itself by the collocation of atoms, according to laws purely mechanical. Now, Agnos- ticism is a most unfortunate name for this creed or rather this want of creed. It is a contradiction in terms. It is a belief that there can be no belief. It begins by telling us that nothing can by possibility be known about God, and it ends by telling us that we do know the most important thing that can be known about Him, namely, that He does not exist. Agnosticism is not only Theological Nihilism, but it is a cowardly name for Atheism. It is based on negation, and yet becomes ludicrously affirmative in its negations. It denies the possibility of the con- ception of a personal God, and then proceeds to affirm to all intents and purposes the Deity of Matter. But how can the modem spread of Agnos- ticism be accounted for ? What causes have con- tributed to its adoption or resuscitation ? That it is gaining popularity is quite clear. Indeed it is not so much argued as assumed that it is true and scientific, even by many who know little or nothing of the arguments by which it is sustained. I believe that if we insist on a diagnosis of the disease, it will be found that it is the widely spread popularity of the theory of Evolution, leading as it does to Ma- terialism, which has fostered Agnosticism and destroyed belief in Theism. In consequence of the acceptance of the Evolution theory, man has come to be regarded as a condensed vegetable with a battery in his head. Influenced by the wonderful genius of Darwin as a naturalist, and even by the fact that he was accorded burial in Westminster Abbey, many rush to the conclusion that the Evo- lution theory has been accepted as proved by the scientific world, and so fashion as usual is enjoying a temporary triumph. Really, as has been well said, * ** We are threatened with a new intellectual tyranny of the most odious kind ; not a dictator- ship of some imperial genius, but a decemvirate of specialists, an oligarchy of experts. The dogma of scientific infallibility is proclaimed without the decorum of an CEcumenical Council, or the election of a Sovereign Pontiff. Evolution is enforced by authority, rather than justified by argument. In reference to it, these are the formulae to which we * Bails of Faith (Oonder) p. 188. Deity of [)f Agnos- lave con- That it d it is not true and r nothing I believe se, it will ilarity of 5 to Ma- :ism and ce of the has come e with a wonderful n by the :stminster the Evo- i by the enjoying »een well tellectual dictator- virate of ogma of tout the election •reed by nt. In hich we it tt are obliged to listen : ' All competent judges are now ;. greed.' . . . ' Every educated person is aware that those best qualified to judge, tell us.' ... 'It can now no longer be questioned.' . . . ' Science tells us/ and such like phrases." But in spite of all these plausible assertions, Evolution remains still an hypothesis only, that is, an unverified supposition. An hypothesis," says Brown in his philosophy, is nothing more than a reason for making one ex- periment or observation rather than another," and Evolution is nothing else. The hypothesis is briefly this, that man is descended from a clot of slimy mud in the depths of the ocean, the atoms of which, by fortuitous concurrence and means purely mechanical, produced protoplasms which in turn begat atnaba which became sponges, and so on through a multitude of evolutions occupying a period of time which for practical purposes differs little from eternity, till at length the tailed apes appeared. Then there is a break in the chain. The links be- tween the apes and man are missing. But the lacunae do not daunt or trouble Professor Haeckel who says, that '' Man-like apes who lost their tails through disuse must have existed in the Miocene period, and from them man was developed." It is here that the hypothesis completely breaks down. We have remains of mammals of the Miocene period, of the Dinotherium, the Mastodon, and even of dog-faced Apes, but not a vestige of ape-like man. Two of the plainest rules of logic are, " No chain is stronger than its weakest link," and " de hon ap- parentibus et non existentibus, eadem est ratio" but II ! w I 8 they are as nothing in the way of Evolutionists. They tell us that though the links are missing, " they must have existed." This surely is not the inductive philosophy of Lord Bacon ; but let us proceed. Another reason for regarding Evolution as an unverified hypothesis is that some of the most distinguished Professors of Natural Science, while admitting that all vertebrate animals pointed to man as the archetype, do not accept Evolution as the true account of the descent of man. Professor Owen, whom Hugh Miller well describes as supreme in his own special walk as a comparative anatomist, says, * " The recognition of an ideal exemplar for the vertebrated animals proves that the knowledge of such a being as man must have existed before man appeared, and that the archetypal idea was manifested on this planet long prior to the existence of those animal species that actually exemplify it ;" and Agassiz, after a survey of the geologic existences more extended and minute, at least in the Ichthyo- logical department, than that of any other man, says, "That there is a manifest progress in the succession of beings on the surface of the earth. This progress consists in an increasing similarity to the living fauna, and among the vertebrates, in their increasing resemblance to man," but he adds, " This connection is not the consequence of a direct lineage between the fauna of different ages. There is nothing like parental descent connecting them." Again, Sir Charles Lyell says, t " No satisfactory proof has yet been discovered of the gradual passage * Testimony of the Books, p. SSB. f Principles of Geology, pp. 146-148. iTolutionists. e missing, is not the but let us Involution as )f the most snce, while pointed to volution as Professor as supreme anatomist, :emplar for knowledge >ted before t idea was le existence mplify it;" ; existences e Ichthyo- ther man, ;ss in the he earth. milarlty to :}rates, in he adds, of a direct s. There ig them." itisfactory al passage >gy, pp. 146-148. of the earth from a chaotic to a more habitable state, nor of any law of progressive development governing the extinction and renovation of species, and causing the fauna and flora to pass from the embryonic to a more perfect condition, from a simple to a more perfect organization." And again he says, " It would not follow that even if there were sufficient geological evidence in favor of the theory of progressive development that the creation of man was the last link in the same chain ; for the sudden passage from an irrational to a rational animal is a phenomenon of a distinct kind from the more simple to the more perfect forms of animal organization and instinct." And once more, ^' It appears that species have a real existence in nature, and that each was endowed at the time of its creation with the attributes and organization by which it is now distinguished." Any theory of Evolution which does not account for the origin of life on earth, leaves us just where we were, believers in creation by a Divine fiat. But Evolutionists are strangely at variance with each other on this point. While Bastian and Haeckel try to account for the origin of life by * Bathybius and spontaneous generation, Huxley, on the other hand, while claiming for himself a philo- sophic faith in the probability of spontaneous gen- eration, says, t " Biogenesis, or life through the ac- tion of life appears to me to be victorious along the whole line at the present day." The experiments of Tyndall corroborate the belief of Huxley who is * AmorphouB protoplasia in the lowest depths of the t Address to the Bntish Association. wmm i t I ' I I ) 10 SO dissatisfied with the differences of opinion among Evolutionists, that he says, *' The army of liberal thought is at present in loose order, and many a freethinker makes use of his freedom to vent non- sense. We should be better for a vigorous and watchful enemy to hammer us into cohesion and discipline, and I for one lament that the bench of Bishops cannot show a man of the calibre of Butler of the Analogy, who, if he were alive, would make short work of the current a priori infidelity." Ac- cording to Mr. Darwin the human brain was de- veloped from the ape brain by the necessities of the case in the struggle for existence, but another great Evolutionist sees in the production of man the intervention of an external will. He remarks, that the lowest types of savages are in possession of a brain, and of capacities far beyond any use to which they could apply them in their present con- dition, and that, therefore, they could not have been evolved from the mere necessities of their environ- ments.* Thus we see that the greatest comparative anatomists in our age, as well as Evolutionists, differ greatly among themselves, as to the descent -of man from the lower strata of beings, and we are there- fore justified in calling Evolution an unverified hypothesis — a guess. The origin of life on earth, which some Evolutionists attribute to material mechanism, is not only discredited by Huxley but by many other great scientists. Sir William Thompson's theory is that an aerolite ejected from some other planet brought the first germs of life to * Mr. Wallaue, quoted in the "UuBeea Universe," p. 178. II lion among of liberal 1 many a vent non- orous and lesion and bench of i of Butler >uld make ty." Ac- 1 was de- essities of it another >f man the remarks, possession ny use to isent con- have been ■ environ- mparative ists, differ nt of man re there- mverified on earth, material ixley but William ed from of life to ours. But it is admitted on all sides that this is but throwing the difficulty a stage back, and leaving us in the dark as to how life originated in the eject- ing planet. For these reasons then we should re- gard Evolution as an unverified hypothesis. It will, however, be asked by thoughtful men, how does it happen that an unverified hypothesis has had such a fascination for so many minds from the age of Lucretius and Horace to that of Darwin and Huxley ? Indeed Horace * writes as though the hypothesis was the general belief in his day, though he does not trace the Evolution of man farther back than to what he calls " Animalia." How comes it then that this theory takes captive so many minds ? The answer is not far to seek. Nothing captivates the human mind so much as system. A theory in two volumes worked out systematically, drawing the reader up by degrees from an asrump- tion, through carefully wrought out analogies, and proceeding along an interesting and cumulative chain of evidences, takes him captive, in spite of the want of some connecting links. We see an instance of this in the way some persons bring themselves to believe in the descent of the Anglo- Saxon race from the lost tribes of Israel. First, there is the assumption that the ten tribes were lost, and then again there are missing links between Hengist and Horsa and the Israelites. Still the theory is maintained by the judicious use of ac- cumulated similitudes, many of them, however, so far-fetched that I should not be surprised if some *~SatireL.a. i! Id tieW ones should be discovered , such as the ten- dency of Saxons to worship golden calves of the human species, and as recent events have proved, " to spoil the Egyptians." In estimating the weight to be attached to such modes of proof, we should bear in mind the weighty words of Lord Bacon, '* Method carrying a show of total and perfect knowledge, has a tendency to generate acquies- cence." It seems to me, therefore, that a great deal of the popularity of Evolution is due to the skilful and systematic way in which it has been presented to the public by its advocates ; the gen- eral effect of the whole theory on the minds of many is ncl ^.ffected by the absence of evidential and necessary links. Agnosticism takes refuge in Evolution in order to get rid of the idea of God as unthinkable and unknowable. But it is the old story of Scylla and Charybdis, for Evolution introduces us to much that is unthinkable and unknowable. For instance, during the unimaginable ages preceding the Evolu- tion of the ear and eye, neither sound nor sight ex- isted. It was only when natural selection seizing on accidental variations developed the eye, that the conjunction of the sun's rays and that organ, caused light and vision to start into existence. They were non-existent till the eye was made, for Agnostics will not allow us to believe that " God saw the light that it was good." Now, that the rudimentary eye should have by natural selection worked in the direction of light which did not exist, is unthinkable, and supposing that it did, that the process took I as the ten- calves of the have proved, ing the weight f, we should Lord Bacon, and perfect rate acquies- that a great due to the it has been ;es; the gen- ie minds of of evidential tion in order linkable and f Scylla and to much that or instance, the Evolu- lor sight ex- tion seizing ;ye, that the rgan, caused They were gnostics will tv the light nentary eye ced in the mthinkable, 'ocess took 13 place without purpose or design is incredible. Sound, too, existed not, till the ear was formed, because on evolutionistic and agnostic principles no earthly ear had been developed, and the ear of God was non-existent. But natural selection struggling to meet the vibration of the air, without purpose or necessity, at last caught a vibration ; in the course of ages the ear improved its capital, and finally sound was created. All this is unthinkable. Again, granting that the maxim of the evolutionist that creation from nothing is unthinkable, that ** Gigni de nihilo nihil, in nihilum nil posse reverti,* is in- disputable, we ask, is not the eternity of matter and its atoms regulating themselves by chance which however always wins, quite as unthinkable, and yet this is the only alternative if we deny that the worlds were framed by the word of God. Is not the belief that the worlds were made by the fiat of an omnipotent Creator quite as thinkable as that they were developed from nebulous fire-dust that existed from eternity, and that they dropped into their places in space by chance which, however, resulted in the planets always poising themselves so that the square of one planet's period of revolu- tion round the sun should be to the square of the next planet's revolution, as the cubes of their dis- tances respectively from the sun ? That this law of Kepler should be the product of chance, is un- thinkable. Agnostics insist that creation ex nihilo in time is unscientific and unthinkable. Of course it is unthinkable on their principles, because time did not exist till man was evolved and his conscious- ;; ((( 1 14 ness developed. Time is but the interval, measur- ed and multiplied, between two states of mental consciousness. But till the Evolution of man there was 110 consciousness of time, because, on the Agnostic hypothesis, the consciousness of a supreme intelligence existed not. Time has no existence outside mind. It is the mind's creation. Therefore, if there be no such thing as the mind of God, and that of man was, up to his Evolution, non-existent, time too was non-existent, so that past, present and future were a unity which no word in language can express. To this unthinkable conclusion are we brought by Agnosticism. And not only are such drafts on our credulity unthinkable, but there are others which, though thinkable, are absurd. The possession by man of certain rudimentary organs is said to prove that he is descended from animals which had them in a state of perfect development. Thus man has a rudimentary tail, showing that he has been evolved from the ape, and the guess is that apes with tails, in the process of ages got rid of them by disuse, so that man's immediate an- cestors were tail-less apes of a species which does not now exist, and whose remains have not as yet been found. So, tails that were developed by means of natural selection and the survival of the fittest, because they were prehensile and useful in climbing trees, became disused and disappeared, they were developed for their utility and abandoned for their inutility. Again, man has rudimentary mamma on his breast, proving that he is descended from a race that had them in perfect development. They, how- e^ o^ ^1 Uj**^ terval, measur- es of mental n of man there Bcause, on the is of a supreme no existence n. Therefore, of God, and , non-existent, t, present and language can iision are we nly are such •ut there are bsurd. The ary organs is rom animals development, ving that he he guess is iges got rid mediate an- which does not as yet ed by means the fittest, in climbing they were id for their mammce on from a race They, how- 15 ever, ceased to be used, and became only rudiments of the original organs. The immediate male pro- genitors of man gave up suckling their young ; so males and females became distinct ; but at the early period of ape- mar's existence, all were females — this is unthinkable. Again, man has rudimentary hair on his body, showing, by parity of reasoning, that his progenitors had a hairy covering for the body. How they got rid of it is not explained. It could not have been through disuse, for that, is un- intelligible, and the strange thing is that they divested themselves of it, not only in hot climates where they did not want it, but in cold climates where they did. Darwin says that the ape-man was in all probability evolved in a hot climate, in Africa, where he lost his hairy covering, as it was useless, but he does not explain how it happened that his descendants in cold climates did not revert to the hairy type of their progenitors the Chim- panzee and the Gorilla, " man's nearest allies." Indeed, it is hard to resist a smile at the attempts to build up such theories on the airy basis of fanci- ful analogies. The relationship of man to the horse is shown by the analogy between the muscular power of the horse to twitch his skin — say, to get rid of a mosquito — and the power of some men to move their scalps. Man's relationship to the frog appears from the fact that man and the frog are the only animals that have calves to their legs ! But let us pass awhile from considering the aid that Evolution gives to Agnosticism, to another point well worthy of our reflection, I mean the tendency ' t i6 ( T :lil of the age to depose God in fevor of natural laws. The reign of law and the working of natural laws are expressions very common and very misleading. ' They seem to deify law, and to withdraw attention from the Lawgiver. They also tend to create a i dislike to anything bordering on the praeternatural or the supernatural. And yet let us ask, what do we mean by natural ? We mean simply, what is in accordance with our own experience, or that of others on whose testimony we rely. The laws of the universe are infinite, and the extent to which man has fathomed them, is incomparably less than the ratio that the scratching of a prairie with the point of a needle bears to the ploughing of a con- tinent. What is natural to-day, was supernatural a few years ago, and what is superi)atural to-day may be quite natural a year hence. Had our grand- fathers been told that we should now be travelling over the world whirled along by steam engines with the roar of a tempest and the speed of an eagle, or that we should utilize the lightning to flash our thoughts around the world in a few seconds, or make the sun paint our portraits, they would have exclaimed, "All this is supernatural." Perhaps our grand -children may smile at our incredulity touching the future, because any day may introduce us to some discovery in nature that will throw all pre- vious discoveries into the shade. We cannot know the limits of the natural or where it blends with or fades into the supernatural. What we call miracles may have been only in accordance with natural laws, though they proved superhuman knowledge of natural laws, of natural laws very misleading, hdraw attention nd to create a le praeternatural s ask, what do «mply, what is nee, or that of The laws of xtent to which irably less than rairie with the ^ing of a con- is supernatural ijatural to-day Had our grand- w be travelling n engines with )f an eagle, or to flash our seconds, or !y would have Perhaps our ulity touching oduce us to Irow all pre- jcannot know snds with or |call miracles ith natural knowledge 17 of those laws. And not only is the word natural misleading, but the word law too. It has been well said that men fancy that their thoughts control their words, but ii: truth, their words control their thoughts. We speak of the operation and working of natural laws, till we fancy that we understand all about them, and we set up an idol of our own mak- ing in the place of a Supreme Being. Yet if we think on the matter, a law does not work, it merely exists. A law cannot work of itself. Unless put into operation by an intelligent executive, it may indeed exist, but it is obsolete, dormant, or a dead letter. Similarly, there are an inBnite number of natural laws now existing of which we know nothing, for we cannot see them in operation. There are laws too in constant operation, and yet all we know about them is that a Supreme Intelligence must be directing them, such as the law that regulates the proportion of the sexes born into the world. We are nearly sure that the ratio is twenty females to twenty-one males, and we can see why the males outnumber the females, in order that provision should be made to supply the loss of males caused by wars and all the other accidents to which they are exposed. But how the law is worked out all the world over, except by the supervision of a Supreme Intelligence, we cannot even conjecture. Other laws innumerable have existed for ages and a few of them, such as the circulation of the blood, have been from time to time discovered, but what is the external force that originated them, or keeps them a going, is unknown. Law is nothing but the m ; nu trace them, the more w!f' ^ '* '° ''«<:<'ver anc f bout the phe„omeTaT„r,r"'*''" ^« ''"o^"' *«'on to materiahsm rt ^'"•'^ '^ ">« '«"•?- mastered the intricacies and ./"r"""'' "^^o has •narvel of mechanism th!.. ''°'"P'«=«'ons of that '<"-eferthewhoi:st";ct„re """. ''°''^' '^ '"<="•"-« pose, to the interaction If 1" '*' .°"S*" "•"« Pur- ■s apt to forget that the T*'"' ""atter. He -chine is 'not ": tlma«: Tnd "i"^ '""^ "•""» /'^""^ of action which he Wh- * ""■**''*«'' the '««« of the action whrchL* ''''"°^^"<1 for the short the discoveries Zt ^ "" ""' <'i-'covered. I„ Of physical sciencT iave hln" "'""' ■" "" ''""<='' " teriahsm, partJy by withL " '*"<'"'«=y to ma! contemplation V^ ^s"""^- •'* "'"^ fr^™ the material, and partly by real' ''Jf""' '° '^hat is "•'^o^bed in complacent °°f ""*'■' ^'"^•<=°"c«'t ach.evements. Still, we fao^ld k °" °" '*'' o*" discoveries. The mC the h » ^''*'^"' ^"^'hese " declaring the glory of r! . ^""^y go on -rk," though i'n many cases'^h ^'""'"^ "'^ '-<"^ mote materialism, and ther^b ? ""^ '^'''J to pro- By some mean or othef "'t^"°''''"'"- fittest in the struggle fnr ! . ""^ ^"""'^al of the "e a law of natuff al° .^f b"" " ''''""^<' to severely taxed. Survival of fh ^« '°' °'"' ^'"th is "'hat? Iftheanswerbe fitt«t."''*~^"«' for argue i„ a circle, and get'no nf' "' '"™^'"S' *« set no wformation whatever 1 s d Ij c n movements from ixperience. The iquences are, and to discover and hat we know all ater is the temp- itomist who has lications of that body, is inclined origin and pur- /ith matter. He ning the human he mistakes the )Covered for the discovered. In 3S, in all branches ndency to ma- e mind from the al to what is |nian self-conceit on its own rateful for these They go on ing His handi- |ay tend to pro- sticism. irvival of the assumed to our faith is t— fittest for urviving, we n whatever. 19 The only rational answer must be, they survive who are fittest for their environments, in size, strength and vigour. But let us consider how far this is the case. As to fitness for survival by reason of size and the strength attendant on size, if we look at a geological chart we see that the reptiles of to-day are mere pigmies compared with those of the secondary formation, and that the mammalia of our time are but dwarfs as compared with the mam- moths of the tertiary formation. Throughout all the geological ages there was a steady diminution in size and its attendant strength, in the animal world. Most of the primeval monsters are extinct, except a few diminutive representatives. So that, in their case, size and strength did not constitute fit- ness for surviving. Many of our existing quadru- peds, and of our diminutive rodents are the same as those that co-existed with the mammoth. So that great inferiority in size was not a hindrance to survival. And ever since man appeared on earth, feeble though he was, and ill-furnished with weapons of o£fence or defence, he has been able to hold his own, and even to prevail against animals the largest and most ferocious, though he has been well nigh helpless against insects that destroy his crops, and locusts that devour the fruits of his labours. Nor is size, even when accompanied with corresponding strength, conducive to survival. Giants as well as dwarfs are not long lived, but on the contrary most liable to early decline. Further, as the same physi- cal laws that prevailed in primeval ages are in force now, since nature is uniform in its workings, let TTP i ' i ; ' m (is see how this law of the survival of the fittest cati be made applicable to the human animal. Can it be truly said that the fittest survive, after a war of thirty or more years has destroyed the flower of the population of a continent — that part of the popu- lation selected for stature and freedom from bodily defect or blemish ? And this has been going on, with more or less interruption, ever since history began. Do the fittest survive famines, pestilences, shipwrecks and all the countless accidents by land and sea ? Is it credible that ever since the advent of Christianity at all events, man has been persis- tently striving to frustrate the law of the survival of the fittest, and for all that, is " increasing and multiplying and replenishing the earth ?" Laws of nature should be obeyed and co-operated with, not fought against and thwarted, and if survival of the fittest be one of those laws, we ought to abolish all asylums and hospitals for the blind, the deaf, the drunkard, the idiot and the lunatic, and we ought to expose to death all sickly, puny and superfluous in- fants. Heathen nations were more consistent be- lievers in the law of the survival of the fittest than we are, for they worked with nature and would have nothing to do with such appliances as now exist for the survival of the M»fittest. All these con- siderations and many others that suggest them- selves, are such a strain on our faith that we ex- claim with that worldly-wise heathen, Horace, Nil agit exemplum litem quod lite resolvit. One difficulty cannot be explained away by raising another, the survival of the fittest cannot be a law y n n 53 n LI V LI t X n )f the fittest can aimal. Can it after a war of I the flower of >art of the popu- om from bodily been going on, ;r since history les, pestilences, idents by land ince the advent as been persis- of the survival increasing and th ?" Laws of erated with, not survival of the it to abolish all the deaf, the and we ought to superfluous in- consistent be- he fittest than ire and would iances as now All these con- suggest them- h that we ex- then, Horace, resolvit. One ly by raising nnot be a law SI of nature, and the mystery of the Mosaic Cosmog- ony cannot be explained away by raising the mystery of Evolution. Let us now proceed to en- quire whether, in spite of Agnosticism, we have hot evident proofs pointing to a Supreme Intelligence. It requires intelligence to understand natural laws, land much more intelligence to have established and {worked them. A common intelligence can under- stand how a steam engine works when the process s explained, but a higher intelligence is needed, to contrive it and set it going. Whenever and where- ;ver we see one intelligence exceeding another, or he highest human intelligence anticipated or sur- )assed by some other, we are led to a belief in a supreme intelligence. When, for instance, we sur- vey one of our mediaeval Gothic Cathedrals and are ost in wonder and delight at its beauty, at the ixquisite combination of airy lightness and massive strength, beauty and harmony associated with trength and solidity, surely any one but an idiot, ees that the architecture was the result of mind — ntelligence. But centuiies after these mediaeval irchitects died, fossils were discovered in rocks in vhich, as Hugh Miller tells us, there is scarce an rchitectural ornament of the Gothic or Grecian tyles which may not be found existing. Man had >een anticipated millions of ages ago by some other ntelligence ; he only imitated unconsciously the vorks of a greater architect, who must have had mind 00, This is not a case of a human architect imi- ating nature, like the Grecian architect copying in he Corinthian or other styles the graceful forms of 22 ',■ the acanthus or other shrubs or flowers. No, the I fluted columns, the sculptured lozenges, the deli- cate diaper work of Gothic Cathedrals, were all created ere man appeared on the earth, and man's intelligence in imitating them, though the model was unknown, proves not only that a superior in- telligence existed before his own, but that his own mind, is one in kind, though infinitely inferior in de- gree, to that of his Creator who formed him after His own image. Or again, the sense of beauty is instinctive in man; he loves the harmony ofcolors, all the hues and shades that create effect, and where he has succeed- ed by his works in producing things of beauty that are a joy for ever, no one whose reason is not shat- tered, will deny that such words indicate intelligence or mind. Let me remind you of what Hugh Miller says of the beauty invented and expressed by a calico printer. A pattern called Lane's Net was the most successful ever tried. Its beauty caused a greater sale than had ever been known. Now mark, that very pattern, only more delicately beauti- ful, was recently discovered in the old red sandstone coral and had been stamped on the rocks countless ages before the appearance of man. If then there was intelligence in the man who drew the pattern the other day, shall we deny it to the worker who anticipaied man in the almost infinite past? Agnos- ticism says that man can know nothing about a Supreme Intelligence. Let us try the assertion by another test. Lines, that is, length without breadth, triangles, squares, ellipses, foci, cubes, are merely mental conceptions, they have no existence of them- wers. No, the enges, the deli- ledrals, were all 33 selves outside man's imagination. Yet man builds upon them and their complex relations wonderful fabrics, and no one in his senses will affirm that a irth, and man's ^^^^ ^£ geometry does not prove the existence of ugh the model t a superior m- but that his own ly inferior in de- mind. Well, man gazes into the starry firmament, and the heavenly bodies are tracked and measured by him, not in their apparent, but in their real, . motions, and lo ! he discovers that the geometric led mm alter tlis conceptions of his own mind were anticipated by a luty is instinctive ^j^j^^j. intelligence myriads of ages before he was 5, all the hues and ^^eated or evolved. In wonder he looks into the ! ne has succeed- planetary system, and he sees his own conceptions s of beauty that ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ wrought out independently, illustrated ison is not shat- ^^ ^^ infinite scale and working from a period in the icate intelligence ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ y^^^ eternity. Surely there is tiat Hugh Miller tjjQ^^j^ j^^^.^ ^^ ^^^^ ^.^^ f^^U prostrate in wonder expressed by a W^ ^^^ ^^^ adore a Supreme Intelligence, while Lane's Net was I ^^^ ^j^^ depths of his heart, as well as from the J beauty caused Convictions of his intellect, he chants a Benedicite. h known. Nowlr^j^jy j^ ^^^ ^^^ because St. Paul was a Jew or a hristian, but because he was a man of powerful ntellect, that he said, "the invisible things of Him rom the creation of the world are clearly seen, eing understood by the things that are made, even is eternal power aijd Godhead, so that they are ithout excuse." It is urged, however, by Agnostics, that the evi- ence for Theism is not convincing, that the exist- e assertion by jn^e of Agnosticism proves that such is the case, and Ithout breadth, ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ philosophic mind are Agnostics. s, are merely fc^^ i^ ^^^ ^^ replied that the evidence is con- tence of them- ■,incing to equally philosophic minds, so that the lelicp.tely beauti- d red sandstone ] Irocks countless! If then there ;w the pattern the worker who j [e past? Agnos- >thing about a I 24 'I ' philosophers on each side may settle the mattel between them, or be considered as neutralizing eaclj other's arguments. Men of philosophic mind h vd doubted their own existence, as well as the exist) ence of matter, and why should it be thought surj prising that they should deny the existence of God It should ever be remembered that the intrinsid value of evidence and the force of that evidence oi differently constituted minds are totally distincl| things. The intrinsic value of evidence is estimatec differently by a learned and experienced judge and by an ordinary juryman. It is not more surprising that a strong intellect should be uninfluenced by certain kind of proof than that a man whose hearing is perfect should be insensible to music or harmony! A mathematician has little taste for any kind ol proof but the mathematical ; and there was a cas^ of a devout Christian mathematician who lost hid reason in the attempt to reduce the evidences ol Christianity to a mathematical shape. Indeed! there are some whom nothing will s&tisfy but oculai demonstration. " Show us the Father and it sufI ficeth us" is their demand ; but that is not a more surprising phenomenon than that a man whose! organ of vision is perfect should have no eye for th^ beauties of nature : "A primrose by the river's brim, A yellow primrose is to him, And it is nothing more." The wish, too, that the evidence may not be con] vincing, is sometimes father to the thought, anc thus when an inability to feel the full force of the evidence is combined with a desire that God shoulc * » ' .. I I I II IIMW well as the exist t be thought sur existence of God 25 settle the matte )e non-existent, we cannot wonder if we find s neutralizing eac! Uheism. The evidence of the senses is said to be sophic mind h v^he highest of all, yet no court would regard the vidence of one whose sense was disordered, whe- her the case in point depended on sight, hearing or |taste. Now, I cannot help thinking that some men that the intrinsic ire born color-blind towards God. To explain to f that evidence 01 he color-blind the wondrous hues of an autumn e totally distinc sunset or a Turner's picture would be useless, and ience is estimatec 50 I cannot help believing that there are men who nenced judge an( aire incapacitated, or rather placed at a great disad- t more surprising vantage, in their search after God. They ask for jninfluenced by i jroof beyond the reach of cavil, though they can lan whose hearing show no title for making ;he demand. The follow- [lusic or harmony ng is the nearest approach yet made by the for any kind ntellect of man to demonstrate that mind rules there was a cas&natter, and to justify our natural belief "in God the ian who lost hi»ather Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth." It the evidences o ivas stated by Professor Haughton, of Dublin Uni- shape. Indeed irersity, in a sermon on the occasion of the meeting satisfy but oculai Df the American Association for the Advancement ather and it suf jf Science: "The principles known as the cons^rwa- at is not a more lion of force and the dissipation of energy render it as a man whos( certain as a mathematical demonstration that the ve no eye for th( present order and laws of nature, if left to them- selves, must end in the entire universe arriving, sooner or later, in a state of death, of absence of all notion, physical as well as vital. If it be thus certain, then, that the universe, if left tc itself, must le thought, anJfcave an end, it is equally certain that it must have ull force of thAad a beginning." This remarkable conclusion, that God shoulcBshown from the facts of the exact sciences, was, I n, may not be con M,( I i 26 believe, first publicly stated by a distinguished Irishl man, William Thompson, who sums up his demonj stration in the following propositions : **I. There is at present in the material world universal tendency to the dissipation of mechanicaf energy. "II. Any restoration of mechanical energy withou^ more than an equivalent of dissipation is impossible in inanimate material processes. "III. Within a finite period of time past th« earth muct have been, and within a finite period o\ time to come the earth must again be, unfit for the habitation of man as at present constituted, unless operations have been, or are about to be, performec which are impossible under the laws to which th( known operations going on at present in the materia world are subject." In other words, something outside nature and he laws has interfered in times past, and will again inter fere in times to come. This is, then, the neares approach that the intellect has made to a demon stration as certain as a mathematical one, and yet am bold to say that to the vast majority of th( human race, even if they could understand it, would not be so convincing as the intuitive, in stinctive feeling within us, for, after all, it may b( said of the great mass of human beings, as nothing but the sun can make us see the sun, so nothing bu God can make us see God. " Sol facit ut sole)) videos; Deus facit ut videos Deum** But all mei have not this intuition. Natural incapacity, anc not any physical research, makes some mei Agnostics. This is evident from the fact that man] of the most successful explorers of the arcana cal energy withou ition is impossibl 27 lature, from Newton to Faraday, have not only istinguished Irish- ^^^^ believers in God, but in the revelation of Jesus ims up his demon ^^^^^^ , ^^^ ^^^^ another fact, that many are Agnostics who have no pretensions whatever to the material world i [jame of scientists, while manv others are Agnostics ton of mechanica , , , ^, i / x- t^ |of some shade or other only for a time. It cannot ave escaped the :>ttention of thoughtful men that here is a sceptical time of life. Up to early man- Ihood a youth for the most part believes what he has of time past th( i^jamed from his parents ; after that, the age of self- I a finite period o ,. . , \ j • i. n ^ i -i. j. n be unfit for th< "^^^^^c®* independence and intellectual conceit sets onstituted unless ^^ * ^^* after the age of forty or fifty, or earlier if t to be, performec the man has been disciplined by affliction, experi- aws to which the|ence sends him back to the belief of that which his mother had taught him. This leads to a pregnant topic, but I must not now dwell upon it further than to suggest that, if my statement is at all correct, the necessity of a religiously scientific education in our universities is imperatively demanded. Irreverence on the part of the young is a characteristic of this generation, and irreverence and Agnosticism act and interact together, so that it is difficult to determine which of the two gives birth to the other ; but it is certain that an irreverent spirit, beginning with dis- respect for parents, age and precedent, often ends _ u* K «^" irreverence towards God, and Agnosticism is ^ ' ^ largely recruited from the irreverent, indeed more .. ^^ „ from them than from the scientific, for scientific exploration will often suggest the noble words of Prince Leopold, in a recent speech at the Mansion House ''that in this world of mysteries arrogant irreverence is the maddest unreason.'* >ent in the materia de nature and he will again inter hen, the neares lade to a demon ical one, and yet majority of th understand it, i the intuitive, in er all, it may b( eings, as nothin But all mei incapacity, anc ikes some mei le fact that man )f the arcana o /i llliiiii I'l : l' / 28 As a practical summing up, let me now addressl Agnostics and believers respectively. And, first, to| Agnostics, I would say, your reasoning is quite aim- less. Your Agnosticism, if you imagine that it willl lead to atheism generally, is quite imbecile. We gol with you a certain distance ; we admit that there isl a sense in which no man can know God. No one! can know God's existence as he knows his own.l Therefore we do not say, I know God the Father! Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, but, I bslievei in God the Father Almighty, and this belief, so far! as it consists in fearing and loving Him, can neverl be overthrown. There is not the remotest chancel of the world ever becoming atheistic, there is morel danger of its becoming "wholly given to idolatry."! We cannot get rid of nature. As Horace says,! " N aturam expellas furcay tamen usqtie recurret" And! if we could divest ourselves of all thoughts of God| as an unattainable object, why in the name of every- thing that is rational should we try to do so ? Where| is the civilized man who can deny that God, or the! conception of God, has been the motive power for! good in everything that concerns the human race ?[ All the virtues we possess are traceable to a belief! in God. What pen can depict or tongue tell or! testify to the amount of happiness conferred on! mankind by the delusion (according to Agnostics)! which inspires happy anticipations of compensation! for earthly miseries, imparts resignation and self-l denial, and has conquered the world by sweetness, love and light. Granting that there are intellectual! difficulties in Theism as well as in Atheism, so thatj II I •( ) 1 i.U >th are l^alanced, throw in the moral perfection of [heism, and then ask yourselves which of the two irns the scale. It is downright cruelty for Agnostics thrust their negations upon us. They remind us the friends of the man of Argos, of whom Horace Writes, that while he was an excellent citizen and srformed all the duties of life most faithfully, he it laboured under the delusion that he was con- ^antly listening to beautiful tragedies; but when irough the kindness of friends, and the use of illebore, he was cured of the delusion, he ex- iaimed : "Pol me occidistisj Amici^ Non servastis" ait, *'cui sic extorta voluptaSf Et demptus per vim mentis gratissimus error;*' — iBy Pollux, you have killed me, not cured me, my jiends, in wringing from me violently a most delight- il delusion." But Agnostics in trying to deprive us the most delightful sensation on earth — the love God — and in their efforts to puzzle us, are but ^rengthening us in our creed. We say to them, )ur Evolutionism and Materialism get rid of soul id its immortality, but Agnostics as you are, that is, Ignoramuses as regards God, soul and immortality, ^hat are you putting in the place of soul ? What is lat consciousness of existence which assures me of ^y personal identity throughout all the flux and futations of my body from childhood to old age ? fou must admit that it is a something — an energy or ►rce. But a prime article of your creed is, "I ilieve in the conservation and transmutation of lergy." The something is therefore immortal. Again TTH iq i '■ 30 we ask, how is this energy or force generated ? Yo reply, by molecular mechanics, by the movemen of atoms which have all the appearance of bein manufactured articles, though we are Agnostics a to the manufacturer. But the second article in th creed of your science is, "I believe in the ind( structibility of matter or mass." Given, therefore human consciousness, (and it is useless to argue wit one who denies it) given consciousness, generatei materially, and we have on your own principles th immortality of what we call soul, whether that soi be energy, force or matter. -. And now a word toTheists, who hold that "ther is a God that judgeth the earth." Alas ! tha Agnosticism should be unwittingly fostered by wea but well meaning religionists. Every caricature ( the Christian's God or the Christian system hel[ Agnosticism. Well has the present Archbishop ( Canterbury said, **I know not whether any stern ( sensuous religion of heathendom has held up befoi men's astonished eyes features more appalling.an more repulsive than those of the vindictive Fathe or of the arbitrary distributor of two eternities Agnostics smile when they see the parodies an travesties of Christianity that are encouraged ai sought to be moulded to God's honour by devoi Christians. They sneer at the unmeaning words pious believers who speak of special providence the intervention of providence, and such like ph nomena, as if God were ever absent from His ov world, and was not always presiding over His ov J ; (11 ■ 31 [eation, but waking up now and again to interfere the affairs of men. He hides Himself so wondrously, As though there were no Ood, He is least seen when all the poweia Of ill are most abroad. Thrice blest is he to whom is given The instinct that can tell, That Ood is on the field when He Seems most invisible. Every sneer at science and every denunciation of [ientific men as such helps Agnosticism. The facts science, provided they be facts and not guesses, [e as true as the facts of religion and proceed from |e same author. We shall never hear the last of ie taunt levelled against the Church, that she jnounced the systems of Galileo and Copernicus, id the same kind of denunciation proceeds apace a minor scale from the lips and pens of well jtentioned but unscientific religionists. It has ien my own lot to meet with gentle upbraidings |r inconsistency of conduct as a Bishop, because I jok the initiative in Canada in inducing the British 5sociation for the Advancement of Science to visit Ie Dominion next year, some of its members being rowed Agnostics. But I have no fears from isaults from without. I do fear them from within ie Christian fortress. The attacks on geology in ir own day have not raised Christian controver- ilists in popular estimation, nor are scientists [tracted to our creed when they sometimes find )probrious epithets substituted for arguments, and |e in the same Christian men contempt for science lited with the grovelling credulity of fanatics. Be Isured that intellectual doubts must be answered iT'^ \a 32 intellectually, and scientific objections be met scientifically, but Agnostics must not be allowed to palm off mere guesses for scientific truths. They must be told that their hypothesis, which takes no account of man's moral nature, which is as much part of his being as his body is, is not strictly scien- tific; that man's cravings after immortality and yearnings after God require from them explanation and cannot be set aside with a contemptuous shrug and a plea of inevitable ignorance. They must be reminded that it is not the part of practical science to give up in 'espair the effort to solve difficult problems, even though they be the discovery of the pole, the squaring of the circle, or the finding of per- petual motion. The searching after God, "if haply we may find Him," will no more be given up by men because Agnostics say that they cannot find Him than the idea of transatlantic steam navi- gation was given up by mechanical engineers because a great mathematician proved its impossi- bility to his own satisfaction. In solving problems in the queen of sciences. Theology, we cannot resign ourselves at the bidding of Agnostics to the torpidity of blank despair. British Whig Steun Pnarcs, Kingaton. cannot find steam navi- al engineers its impossi- ing problems we cannot lostics to the Mr .«' '-•>e 4 ,hjg *"?& >*? 4' 'iir-**; ,f% » - ^ - V '^ ^ ^-i .'^'h U-' ''.T .r-,*tri5.«:i fi.i' S'