(t)M% 
 
 ^j^.!,^ 
 
 
 \t'^-+'— / 
 
 ^i. C 
 
 
 :00^^^M^ 
 
^£.^'^4,.t*4^-<4«H>.«^4i^ 
 
 ^ ^^A^^t^,^J^ 
 
 The Relatioi of Christian Educators to tlie Mm Ehases of Science. 
 
 By DANIEL S. MARTIN. A. M., 
 
 Professor of Geology and, Natural History in Rutgers Female College^ 
 
 From the Proceedings of the University Convocation, held at Albany, N. Y. 
 July 29th, 30th and 31st, 1873. 
 
 S 
 
 } 
 
THE RELATION OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATORS TO THE MODERN 
 PHASES OF SCIENCE. 
 
 By Daniel S. Martin, A. M. , 
 
 Professor of Geology and Natural History in Rutgers Female College. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convocation. — In presenting you with a few 
 thoughts in regard to the relation of the Christian educator to the 
 modern problems of science, I must begin by saying that it is with 
 much hesitation that I approach this subject, partly because it may 
 seem, in some respects, a very hackneyed one, and partly from the 
 great importance of the theme, and the consequent difficuhy of deal- 
 ing with it in any adequate manner. I am led to the attempt, how- 
 ever, partly because of that very importance which renders it so hard 
 to treat aright, and partly because, two years ago, in this room and 
 before this body, the gauntlet was openly thrown down to science, 
 and has not yet been formally and fearlessly taken up. 
 
 The whole subject seems divisible into three main parts, viz. : 
 
 I. The fact of a long and lamentable controversy between Christian 
 and scientific modes of thought. 
 
 II. The causes and reasons of this controversy. 
 
 III. The methods of its possible removal. 
 
 To these three points, Mr. Chancellor and gentlemen, I would, 
 therefore, request your attention. 
 
 I. The fact of such controversy. 
 
 We are certainly living in one of the most remarkable periods of 
 the history of our world, — one which is marked by such vast, rapid 
 and varied developments of human progress, in its best and noblest 
 forms, as no other age has seen. This great advance, complex and 
 manifold as it is, we are wont well to sum up under the name of 
 Christian civilization. If we examine it, we shall find it to have in 
 general a twofold aspect, moral and material, and to owe its wonder- 
 ful character to this fact : it is the expansion of human knowledge, 
 culture, intercourse, and invention, guided and directed by the divine 
 influence of the Christian religion.' It is Christianity and civilization, 
 distinct in their nature as heaven and earth, but united in their 
 action on society, that make this world all that it is to-day, and all 
 that it can hope to become in the future. 
 1 
 
2 University Convocation. 
 
 Between these two great forces, w^hich together are engaged in the 
 improvement and elevation of mankind, one would naturally suppose 
 that there would be the warmest and closest sympath}- ; that the 
 laborers in each department would look with joy and pride on the 
 achievements of their co-laborers in the other. But such is not the 
 case. To a limited extent, and in occasional instances, we do indeed 
 find such a spirit displayed. But I fear that it is not overstating 
 the facts, to say that the general attitude of science and religion 
 toward each other has been, and still is, one of jealousy, of fear, and 
 of either open or covert opposition. 
 
 In every contest which prevails among men, it is generally found 
 that, whatever real and great grounds may exist, much of the 
 estrangement is due to mutual misunderstandings. If these can be 
 removed, the way to peace and harmony is made far easier than it 
 would otherwise have seemed. In this view, let us see if it be not 
 possible to trace some ways in which we, as Christian educators, may 
 help to bring about a better state of feeling in this most unhappy con- 
 test between science and religion, in which, from our very position, 
 we must, of necessity, in some degree take part. 
 
 Admitting, then, that such a conflict exists, as a great and lamenta- 
 ble fact, we seek to trace for a moment some of its leading causes. 
 
 All false and erroneous systems of religion, from their very nature, 
 as founded in and relying upon ignorance, must inevitably hate and 
 oppose the enlightenment of the human mind in almost any direction, 
 as thereby their power is weakened and their downfall shadowed 
 forth. Were our inquiry, therefore, concerned with the conflict 
 between science and religion as it exists in pagan or Mohammedan 
 lands, or even in those Christian countries which cherish any form of 
 superstition, the answer as to the reason of such opposition would be 
 easy and plain enough. But we are looking to the facts as they 
 appear in our own" favored country, and in the most advanced and 
 enlightened communities of the globe. Why is it that here such a 
 discord still exists ? Why do we find it appearing among ourselves, 
 somewhat as it does in lands overspread with superstition and 
 ignorance ? 
 
 If we look at the question, it is certainly grave enough to attract 
 our most serious consideration. 
 
 Returning again to our former comparison, we see that in every 
 human contest or disagreement, there are almost invariably faults 
 and errors on both sides, which, in some degree, divide the responsi- 
 bility between the two parties to the strife. So^ undoubtedly, will it 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 3 
 
 be found to be here. The errors, the faults, are not confined to 
 either side ; and it will be the object of this paper to seek to point 
 out impartially some of these causes. 
 
 Here we may as well define our position at once, as standing on 
 the basis of faith in the Christian Scriptures, as embodying the revela- 
 tion of Himself by the living God and personal Creator of the uni- 
 verse, and containing " all things that pertain unto life and godliness, 
 through the knowledge of God arid of Jesus our Lord." We have 
 no desire to discuss this question, or any other, from any different 
 stand-point, and would decline to enter at present into any debate 
 that involves this position. It is to Christian educators, and to such 
 alone, that this discussion is presented. 
 
 II. Turning now to the causes of the conflict alluded to, we find 
 that there is one important reason which depends on the fundamental 
 position of the Christian faith. Explain it as we may, the idea of a 
 living, personal God is displeasing to many men, and they seek to avoid 
 it by whatever means can be found. Both philosophy and science 
 afford to such minds an endless series of opportunities for raising 
 questions and difiiculties as to the being or the personality of a God ; 
 and thus it comes to pass that there is, and has been, a long, active, 
 and irreconcilable conflict between those who accept, and those who 
 dispute, the fact of a Divine existence and control. The former class, 
 of course, includes all religious writers and thinkers; the latter 
 includes many men who have achieved intellectual eminence, not only 
 in science, but in various departments of knowledge. Many of these, 
 however, have been students of nature, and have used their discove- 
 ries and reputations in support of atheistic views. Thus, in the 
 minds of many devout men, unacquainted with science, and judging 
 the whole body of scientific thinkers by a part of their number, there 
 has arisen a feeling of alienation and suspicion, w^hich has contributed 
 much to this estrangement. 
 
 If we go still deeper, however, and inquire. Why this disposition to 
 exclude the idea of God, which has appeared so strongly in the writ- 
 ings of scientific and philosophical students? — we are unable to 
 explain it, save in the light of that very revelation which such writers 
 reject. Here we are told that the whole race is in some way morally 
 perverted, and alienated from God and all true excellence, while retain- 
 ing intact its intellectual capacities, and also a large residuum of 
 domestic, social, and public virtue. If this be so, as both history and 
 inward experience attest, it is easy to see why men, even of the 
 highest intellect, do " not like to retain God in their knowledge." 
 
4 University Convocation, 
 
 ^' Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools," and " the 
 fool hath said in his heart, there is no God." 
 
 There is little doubt that the disposition thus displayed by many 
 men of science, lies at the root of much of the conflict alluded to. 
 So far and so often as this tendency manifests itself, it cannot but 
 awaken earnest opposition and remonsti-ance, and result in a feeling 
 of jealousy and suspicion, on the part of believers in the greatest of 
 truths. 
 
 Bnt apart from an absolute and intentional advocacy of atheistic 
 ideas, there is on the part of many scientific men a carelessness, or 
 even a hostility, of expression toward religious truth, which awakens 
 deep distrust. Even when this is not the case, there is often a cer- 
 tain kind of nature-worship, a glorification of science as the one and 
 only agency in the advancement of humanity, and an utterly mate- 
 rialistic and secular mode of speech, which cannot but offend and 
 repel many thoughtful minds, who would be ready enough to admit 
 and approve any moderate statement of the claims of science. Pro- 
 fessor Huxley, for instance, is a man who stands confessedly among 
 the foremost naturalists of our day; and we honor and admire him, 
 and rejoice in much that he has done. But when he tells us that 
 "objects of sense are more worthy of attention than inferences and 
 imaginations. You cannot see the battle of Thermopylae take place. 
 What you can see is more worthy of your attention," — no earnest and 
 thoughtful man can fail to recoil into opposition, both to the logic 
 and to the sentiment. As for the reasoning, what can we see with 
 the material eye ? Forms and colors simply, sometimes fixed, some- 
 times changing. Philosopher, infant, idiot, animal, — all see these 
 same things, and naught else. Cause and consequence, attraction 
 and repulsion, atoms and forces, life and energy, all these are as 
 unseen as the battle of Thermopylae ; and not only so, but they 
 never have been or can be seen, save by the same mind, itself invisi- 
 ble, that conceives alike of nature and of history, of past, present, and 
 future. As to the sentiment, let us weigh carefully all that Professor 
 Huxley has taught us, and that is much, concerning zoological classi- 
 fication, and the doctrine of protoplasm, and then compare with it 
 the influence exerted on the minds and hearts of men for over 2,000 
 years by the tale of the heroic leader and undaunted band, firm in 
 their love and devotion to the laws and honor and freedom of their 
 country, standing calmly to the death in that wild pass in Locris, 
 Humanity is richer and nobler for it to-day, and will be to the end of 
 time. Every truth has its value, and none is to be lightly esteemed ; 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 5 
 
 bat all that we have yet learned about protoplasm, or " Man's Place 
 in Nature," is powerless to stir the heart and quicken the spirit and 
 strengthen the hand, as does this ancient record, which is part of the 
 world's best and noblest heritage. Nay, Professor Huxley himself 
 tells us that, ' if he were compelled to choose between absolute mate- 
 rialism and absolute idealism, he should be compelled to accept the 
 latter alternative ; ' and here the immortal man rises into expression 
 above the mere student of physical science. But this intense secu- 
 larity, this exclusive looking at the things that are " seen and tem- 
 poral," repels and prejudices men of earnest moral and spiritual 
 thought. Often it is but a manner of speech that such writers fall 
 into unintentionally, but it is none the less unhappy in its results. 
 
 Quite apart from these tendencies that prevail among some men of 
 science, there is a large class of unbelievers and opposers of religion, 
 who have no claim to scientific consideration, and no real care for 
 scientific interests, but who seize upon and magnify every actual or 
 possible ground of difi'erence between natural and scriptural truth, 
 out of mere hostility to the latter. Such persons gain prominence 
 frequently as popular lecturers, newspaper and magazine writers, etc., 
 and create an amount of noise and of mischief totally out of propor- 
 tion to their own caliber. They pervert and misrepresent science for 
 the sake of assailing religion, and, like the brutal camp-followers of 
 an army, create alienations that react upon the party in whose uni- 
 form and name their excesses are committed. 
 
 But these are only the more familiar of the many aspects of this 
 subject. It now behooves us to see, on the other hand, if there be not 
 grounds of controversy, less vital and less excusable, on the part of 
 the religious world. 
 
 Among the first and most important of these, seems to us to be an 
 underestimation of pure science, and an unfamiliarity with the spirit 
 of scientific investigation. I do not allude here to that sordid view 
 which delights in calling itself by the taking name of " practical," 
 and which would measure the capacities and achievements of the 
 human mind by the standard of cash-books and dividends. The 
 spirit to which I refer is of a nature far more subtle and complex. 
 In part, perhaps, it arises from a certain kind of moral and religious 
 depth of feeling, which, although unhappy and overstrained, is yet 
 an error only, and not a folly or a wrong. Many earnest men, 
 whose hearts are strongly impressed with tlie moral necessities and 
 responsibilities of our race, and by the fleeting character of all tempo- 
 ral and earthly objects, as compared with the unending life beyond, 
 
6 University Convocation: 
 
 have been unable to feel mnch interest in the pursuits of pure sci- 
 ence, and have looked upon them as really of but little moment. 
 
 There is a great truth in this view, and a great error likewise. 
 We respect the feeling from which it springs, while we regret the 
 tendency that results. To some minds, it may be unavoidable to feel 
 thus, overpowered by the sense of vast and endless issues depending 
 on these few years which their fellow-men around them are hurrying 
 through, careless, hopeless, and Godless. This is especially the case 
 with some Christian ministers, whose hearts not only, but whose 
 hands, are filled and burdened with a work of the greatest and most 
 absorbing responsibility. But all forms of human activity and pro- 
 gress are so bound together that they cannot be separated ; and any 
 feeling of this kind would, if logically carried out, condemn the world 
 to ignorance and stagnation. 
 
 There is yet another feeling somewhat akin to this last, but far less 
 excusable. I think there is a lingering idea in many minds that there 
 is something a little daring and irreverent in thus pressing into the 
 inmost recesses of life and of natui'e. This idea, so far as we have it, 
 is a faint echo of classical or other heathenism, of systems in which 
 man was so nearly equal to the gods, that the latter had all the time 
 to keep him at arm's length in order to their own " tenure of office." 
 The universe was, in this state of belief, like some large manufactory, 
 with a high board fence, from which the proprietors, who have pirated, 
 bought, or invented, some improved processes, are forced rigorously 
 to exclude all inquiring visitors, and so fasten up " Positively No 
 Admittance" on every avenue of approach. The lingering remnant 
 of this feeling, which, perhaps, is more wide-spread than would be 
 readily admitted, is fainter now than it has probably ever been in the 
 history of the world before. But it is well that we should note it as 
 one element of our subject. It betrays itself in such common expres- 
 sions as "daring investigators," or "wresting her secrets from 
 unwilling nature," etc., which have no propriety save where actual 
 hardship or peril is involved. It is the old idea of the jealousy of 
 a miserable tribe of divinities, aroused by the power and energy of 
 man : 
 
 ** Audax omnia perpeti 
 Gens humana ruit per vetitum nefas. 
 * * * * 
 
 Nil mortalibus ardui est ; 
 Coelum ipsum petimus stultitia, neque 
 
 Per nostrum patimur scelus 
 Iracunda Jovem ponere fulmina." 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 7 
 
 How grand is the contrast in tlie Old Testament Scriptures! 
 " The heaven, even the heavens, are the Lord's, but the earth hath He 
 given to the children of men," and that long-earlier utterance from 
 God himself, giving universal dominion to our race, and issuing the 
 command to subdue the earth. And not only in the Old Testament, 
 but all through the Scriptures, while there is the most positive asser- 
 tion of the weakness of human wisdom in the sight of God, and of its 
 total inadequacy to help or save men in moral and spiritual relations, 
 there is not a trace of this heathen idea of a divine jealousy of man's 
 attainments in the study of nature. Tflie whole suggestion should be 
 relegated forthwith to the region of omens, witchcraft, and spirit- 
 rappings. 
 
 But it is rather to a more general kind of estrangement between 
 the religious and the scientific modes of thought and investigation, — a 
 mutual want of intercourse, appreciation, and understanding, — that 
 we must attribute a great deal of the difficulty. In this respect, the 
 blame is about equally divided between the two sides; and the 
 remedy lies, in part, with whichever will recognize the error. 
 Our religious writers and thinkers hold aloof too generally from 
 scientific men. They have not learned, or do nat cultivate, a spirit 
 of hearty interest in scientific achievements and inquiries. Looking 
 upon the study of nature as something wholly foreign to their 
 chosen field, a feeling grows up that " the Jews have no dealings 
 with the Samaritans ; " and the result is a great and mournful con- 
 troversy. 
 
 If we should yet again recur to our former illustration, we should 
 find it universally recognized that intercourse between nations is 
 usually one of the surest safeguards against war; and that just in pro- 
 portion as men and communities learn to know each other, visit each 
 others' homes, and look in each others' faces, and feel the com- 
 mon humanity that lives and looks and speaks in each and all, so far 
 does the idea of conflict become painful and abhorrent, and the possi- 
 bility of peace and of harmony increase. 
 
 It is this holding aloof, this separation between our religious and 
 our scientific thinkers, that more than anything else, perhaps, gives 
 rise to this state of discord. Insomuch is this recognized as the pre- 
 vailing condition of affairs, that any exception to it is regarded as 
 unusual and singular. Scientific men are apt to regard with feelings, 
 and even with expressions, of pleased surprise, a minister who can 
 meet them in anything like free and intelligent converse on ques- 
 tions of recent scientific discovery. It is not, I think, overstating the 
 
8 University Convocation. 
 
 facts, to say that such cases are really rare. The consequence is, that 
 between the expounders of these two great modes of thought there 
 is little or none of that harmonizing and softening influence, that 
 springs from tlie friendly comparison of even widely differing views. 
 Hardly to be separated from this last-mentioned cause, and in great 
 part due to it, is the existence of a vast amount of positive ignorance, 
 on each side, as to the well-known truths and principles of the other. 
 This fact is one of the most conspicuous possible to those who have 
 any real acquaintance with both departments, and yet it seems to be 
 completely unknown or unheeded by the disputants. With what 
 coolness and assumption do scientific writers all the time undertake 
 to extend their reasonings into subjects w^holly diiferent in kind from 
 those in which such reasonings are valid ! How often are the rules 
 of logic, and the well-known principles of philosophical reasoning, 
 quietly dispensed with, in order to introduce the celebrated " methods 
 of induction" into some new and untried field, wherein experimental 
 or statistical tests are impossible, and induction therefore worthless. 
 On the other hand, what surprising ignorance of familiar facts in 
 recent science may be found "full-high displayed" in many reviews 
 of scientific books and essays attempted in our religious journals. It 
 would be ludicrous, if it were not so melancholy, to witness the treat- 
 ment received in such quarters by many of the grandest achieve- 
 ments of our day. We no longer hear any question raised as to 
 antipodes, or the motions of the earth ; that is thoroughly past. But 
 there are still to be found men of high intelligence and culture 
 who hesitate about the clearest principles of geology, mock at the 
 glacial era, and set themselves in the face of the whole grand series 
 of conceptions which begin to entitle the modern student to the high 
 name of " interpres naturm^^'^ while no less rninistering to an intelli- 
 gent and earnest Christian faith. Two such volumes have been 
 given to the American public within the past year, and they have 
 attracted much attention. One of these, in particular, has been 
 lauded to the skies in at least one leading religious journal ; a work 
 with a sounding Latin title, and coolly dedicated to the Supreme 
 Creator, but occupied largely with an onslaught upon the grandest 
 scientific generalization as to the Creators method which the human 
 mind has attained— the JNebular Theory of the universe. Eitlier not 
 knowing, or not caring to know, that this conception of the philoso- 
 pher Kant, as well as of the astronomer Laplace, has long since passed 
 into the recognized mental furniture of almost every student of physi- 
 cal science, and is receiving new and cumulative proofs from year to 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 9 
 
 year, the author of this treatise assails it with a tempest of convulsive 
 rhetoric, only comparable to the frantic gong-beating of a " heathen 
 Chinee," under the frightful apprehension of the sun's being swal- 
 lowed by a dragon. The remedy, in both cases, is equally adapted to 
 the nature and extent of the peril. 
 
 But the mischief which such writings are calculated to do is 
 extremely grave. They widen terribly the breach between science 
 and faith, and increase and multiply the difficulties and dangers to be 
 encountered by many minds, in passing from the receptive stage of 
 youth to the reflective stage of independent manhood. It is one of 
 the saddest aspects of modern culture, this hostile position occupied 
 by so many expounders of science and of religion. There are infinite 
 shipwrecks, — shipwrecks of faith, usefulness, and heaven, — that have' 
 happened, and will happen, again and again, from this only cause. 
 The fearful w^ords of our Saviour in regard to " offenses," come forci- 
 bly to mind in dwelling on this theme ; and I can scarce conceive of 
 a higher responsibility resting on a Christian educator, than that of 
 so training the minds that come under his charge that they shall be 
 able to pass safely through these ordeals of intellectual conflict. But 
 no man can lead others in a path that he does not himself know and 
 follow ; and hence it becomes every such guide and trainer of youth 
 to look well to his own foundations and methods. 
 
 This want of acquaintance with scientific truth on the part of so 
 many Christian writers and teachers, arises from several causes. 
 Some of these I have already alluded to independently, viz. : (1) the 
 absorbing claims and responsibilities of the ministerial calling, and 
 the overshadow^ing weight of great moral themes ; (2) a lingering 
 half-doubt as to the legitimacy of the spirit of universal investigation ; 
 and (3), and most important, a want of sympathy and intercourse with 
 men of scientific pursuits. Among other grounds I would mention 
 the following as of most importance : (1) the want of proper scien- 
 tific instruction in the course of education ; (2) the lack of ready 
 means for keeping pace with the vast and ever-widening progress of 
 scientific research. 
 
 The want of proper scientific instruction in youth, is an evil which 
 belongs to the past, but which need not, and, we may hope, will not be 
 felt so much in the future. The men who graduate from our colleges 
 now have generally some fair amount of information in the depart- 
 ment of science, and some interest in it ; in many cases this interest is 
 very great, and it is only needful to refer for examples to tlie scien- 
 tific culture and capacity of many of our most honored and devoted 
 
10 University Convocation. 
 
 foreign missionaries. But not all our colleges are careful and active 
 in this matter even yet ; and in our theological seminaries, where 
 some acquaintance with science should be a matter of most earnest 
 heed, what provision does it receive? We do occasionally hear of a 
 course of lectures before a theological seminary by some gentleman, — 
 perhaps able and eminent in science, perhaps otherwise, — on the 
 ••' Relations of Science and Religion." The course may be one of 
 great value and importance, as has been the case with some that have 
 been given of late in such connections ; but even then, half of those 
 who attend it have never received any such previous training in the 
 rudiments of the subject as would enable them to grasp the real 
 import of the facts and distinctions cited. They hear of the origin of 
 species and varieties, of the principles of structural classification, of 
 the correspondence between the succession of types in time and their 
 advancement in rank, etc., without, perhaps, being able to distinguish 
 between a species and a variety, or having any clear idea of the dif- 
 ferences which determine grade in structure, and which, therefore, 
 lie at the basis of classification, and of all our reasonings on the order 
 of rank and the development of life. If the lecturer is able and 
 accomplished, he is above the majority of his hearers; and if such is 
 not his character, he is likely only to do harm, and to occupy himself, 
 and entertain his audience, with rhetorical demolitions of the glacial 
 period, the nebular hypothesis, or the correlation of forces, to say 
 nothing of the doctrine of evolution. 
 
 And here I am brought to the mention of two points, which are of 
 vital importance in this whole discussion. These are, our growing 
 system of " elective studies," and the character of our scientific text- 
 books. 
 
 (A.) As to the elective system. It has long been, and still is, a 
 great and perplexing question how to make our college education 
 more effective, and to enable it to keep pace with the growth of 
 human knowledge. The advantages of a classical training are 
 unquestionable ; but if we attempt to gain the full benefit of them, 
 they occupy an amount of time which leaves little opportunity for 
 the teaching of science, now becoming so highly important. Hence 
 has arisen the anti-classical war, waged so energetically of late years 
 in the name of science (though not largely by men of true scientific 
 eminence), under the plausible title of The New Education. 
 
 As the result, we have seen the very wide adoption of a system of 
 compromise, by which students are allowed to choose, in the later 
 years of their course, between scientific study on the one hand and 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 11 
 
 the old curriculum of classical, literary, and, perhaps, philosophical 
 instruction on the other. This seems at first sight very fair and suit- 
 able. Every student does as he thinks best in his unfledged wisdom, 
 chooses those studies which fall in with his intended profession, and 
 so everybody is satisfied. Gentlemen of the Convocation, fellow- 
 instructors of youth, let us take warning in time ! What will be the 
 result of this system twenty years hence ? It needs no prophet to 
 foretell it. These same evils and perils which we have been lament- 
 ing to-day, instead of being modified and healed, will be greatly 
 intensified. We shall have a Christian ministry wholly ignorant of 
 science, and a body of scientific men ignorant, not only of classics, so 
 necessary in scientific language, but of the laws and principles of 
 philosophical reasoning. These results may be modified, perhaps, by 
 care and watchfulness on the part of instructors ; but a more perni- 
 cious and dangerous experiment in our college education it' would be 
 hard to devise. Every young man, eagerly looking forward to life, is 
 anxious, of course, to make his college training go as far as it can 
 toward fitting him for his chosen sphere. Inevitably, therefore, the 
 intended naturalist drops philosophy and classics, which are, perhaps, 
 wearisome and dull to him, just as soon as he can, and spends his last 
 year or two in geological excursions and in the chemical laboratory. 
 In like manner, the intended minister thinks he can dispense with 
 scientific studies, and gives himself to Greek, philosophy, and rhetori- 
 cal practice. Each, perhaps, saves a year and is crippled for a life- 
 time. That professional one-sidedness, from which, arises so much of 
 all this mournful separation and misunderstanding, is fostered and 
 intensified, and a full, broad, liberal scholarship will soon become a 
 thing of the past. It is easy to quote specious maxims about the 
 advantages of concentrating energy on one subject, etc., but these 
 will not do away with the facts. The true work of the college is 
 totally distinct from that of the professional school : it is encyclopae- 
 dic, not specific ; and just so far as we try to combine the two, we 
 shall miserably err. The college lays the broad foundations of gene- 
 ral culture, on which the structure of professional scholarship shall be 
 afterward reared ; and if it take cognizance at all of the intended 
 career of the student, its aim should rather be to supply and develop 
 those forms of mental training from which his future course will tend 
 by disuse to lead him away. 
 
 But, it will be asked, what is to be done ? There is not time in 
 the college course for all that it seems indispensable to have taught. 
 I have not space now, nor would it fall altogether within the scope 
 
12 University Convocation, 
 
 of this essay, to enter upon such a discussion. But almost anything 
 were better than such a perilous separation between professional 
 modes of thought. It is bad enough certainly now, even before the 
 men trained under the elective system have come forward into promi- 
 nence. There is already plenty of loose logic in the reasoning, and 
 of bad classics in the nomenclature, to be found in our scientific 
 works, and plenty of ignorance of science in our theological and reli- 
 gious writers. Gentlemen of the Convocation, let it be our most 
 earnest aim, in whatever manner and measure we can, to avoid 
 increasing these evils. If the elective system has to be employed, let 
 it be guarded with watchful care. Let a certain amount of scientific 
 training, in principles rather than details, be rigorously insisted on 
 for every man who passes through the college course, especially if he 
 looks forward to the ministry ; and likewise, let every " scientific 
 course " be required to include the departments of mental philosophy 
 and logic, and I may add, perhaps, of Christian evidences. 
 
 (B.) But I pass to the other point of w^eakness in our scientific 
 instruction, that of text-books. I am sure that my friend. Professor 
 Hartt, will bear me out in all that I may say on this point, and I 
 rejoice that he is with us in this meeting, as representing the depart- 
 ment of geology and natural history, in which I should otherwise 
 stand '' solitary and alone." 
 
 What sort of text-books have we in science? In chemistry and 
 physics we are far better off than in the natural sciences proper; but 
 even in the former the ideal book is very far from being at hand. In 
 geology w'e have fortunately had Professor Dana's admirable volume 
 for ten years past. But what is the geology of ten years ago, or, one 
 might almost say, of five years ago, to-day ? Many doubtful points 
 have been solved, many missing links supplied, and many new and 
 most important additions and modifications have arisen ; others are 
 arising from year to year, and almost from month to month. If the 
 teacher is one who can supplement the text-book largely by lectures 
 on these points, very much is gained ; this is w^hat every college pro- 
 fessor is properly expected to do. But for the multitude of teachers 
 who are not specialists, the men who have the principal work of an 
 academy or seminary on their hands, this is generally impossible. 
 The information of recent discoveries does not reach them ; or if it 
 does, it is only in such fragmentary and unreliable forms that they 
 can make no real use of it. In the department of zoology the case is 
 ten times worse. With the exception of elaborate works, too large and 
 too expensive to be used by students as text-books, such as Carpen* 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 13 
 
 ter's Principles of Comparative Physiology, Owen's Anatomy of 
 Vertebrates and of Invertebrates, Herbert Spencer's Principles of 
 Biology, etc., we have no work on philosophical zoology that is 
 worth naming. Tliere are some few small text-books in this depart- 
 ment ; but they are superficial and merely descriptive, not entering 
 at all into the real foundations of the science. One work on the 
 principles of zoology, that is still largely in use, was from the first 
 exceedingly weak and defective at many points, and has actually had 
 no revision in more than twenty years that have elapsed since its 
 issue ! ! AVhat sort of knowledge can be gained from such a text- 
 book to-day ? 
 
 Here, again, there is an " evil under the sun," which calls for 
 decided remark. I alhide to the stereotyping of text-books in sci- 
 ence. Such a work can no more be of high value, unless revised 
 from edition to edition, than can the mirror of a solar microscope, 
 unless made to follow the change of position of the sun. But when 
 such a book is issued and puffed and advertised, the object is to 
 '' make it pay," and to run it through a number of editions with the 
 least expense and the most profit. Of course, therefore, it is stereo- 
 typed ; and then no pains are spared to keep it in use as long as possi- 
 ble unaltered, and to hide and palliate every defect that the constant 
 advance of science may reveal or cause. After some years, notes or 
 an appendix will be added, covering so much new matter as can be 
 introduced without involving too great a change in the work, and it 
 is then put forth with new energy. I have particularly in mind a 
 most flagrant case that occurred within a year or two past, in which 
 an eminent publishing house prepared in this way a revised edition 
 of a text-book on chemistry. The book had been a good one in its 
 day, and the reviser was an able and excellent man. But instead of 
 simply announcing these facts, and commending the work on that 
 basis, which would have been perfectly fair, the publishers, in their 
 advertising journal, professedly " devoted to the interests of educa- 
 tion," made a violent assault on the new system of chemical nomen- 
 clature, on the most flimsy grounds, dissuading teachers from adopt- 
 ing it by all the trivial arguments that could be urged. Their own 
 revised volume, of course, followed the old method ; and here was 
 presented the spectacle of a so-called educational paper fighting 
 against the progress and improvement of chemical instruction, in the 
 interest of the publishers' cash-book. Every teacher will recall the 
 bitterness with which some publishers seek to disparage the works of 
 rival houses, and the harshness and grossness which have at times 
 
14 University Convocation, 
 
 made such publishers' circulars and "journals " worthy competitors 
 with the lowest style of political newspapers. 
 
 We need, moreover, a wholly different kind of text-books for the 
 teaching of science. The bane of all of them is the large proportion 
 of detail that is given, and the small amount of principles. Details 
 belong to the professional student ; the principles should form part of 
 the liberal education of every man and woman. Details are, of neces- 
 sity, forgotten ; principles can be retained: and if the latter be once 
 mastered and lield, any details that may be needed in after life can 
 easily be gained ; while no amount of half-remembered particulars 
 will enable a man to grasp at will the general laws of a science ; the 
 former are of value only as they illustrate the latter. What is 
 needed in the crowded years of a college course is a class of brief text- 
 books, that shall clearly present the general principles in each depart- 
 ment of science. These manuals should never be stereotyped, but 
 should be revised every year or two, perhaps by a committee of pro- 
 fessors appointed for the purpose, so as to make the instruction of our 
 colleges and seminaries keep pace with the swift advances of science. 
 They should then be thoroughly studied and recited upon by the 
 class, while all the details which it is desirable or possible to bring in 
 should be given by the professor or teacher in the form of lectures 
 and illustrations. The professional scientific instructor can do this 
 from his own resources ; the general teacher, by means of reading 
 and studying for the purpose. 
 
 Such manuals, moreover, would serve to suppl}- another want to 
 which allusion was made just now, viz. : that of some ready means by 
 which men in all professions might gain, in brief compass, a trust- 
 worthy account of the progress of natural and physical sciences in 
 their several departments. 
 
 I would earnestly suggest that the Board of Regents should take some 
 action looking toward such a system, or at least that some committee be 
 appointed among the professors of the State, to consider the possibili- 
 ties and the means of its adoption. The Board might also require 
 certain standard works in recent science, and the annuals of scientific 
 discovery from year to year, to be placed in the library of every institu- 
 tion reporting to them, or partaking of the Literature Fund of the 
 State. 
 
 But I have, perhaps, wandered too far from the immediate theme 
 of this paper, and must pass rapidly on to its conclusion. In speak- 
 ing of the frequent estrangement or want of sympathy which exists 
 between religious and scientific thinkers, I have traced it largely to a 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 15 
 
 mutual ignorance of each others' real positions and views ; and this 
 ignorance, I have sought in turn to trace partly to certain defects in 
 our system of instruction. The mention of these has led to a digres- 
 sion as to the possibility of improvements, hardly germane to the 
 original subject. 
 
 One of the last and most important points worthy of especial men- 
 tion as a cause of difficulty aild alienation, is the harsh and captious 
 mode of speech employed by many religious and other critics toward 
 the views of men of science. How freely are such terms as " infidel," 
 " materialist," " unbeliever," etc., applied to men who have really 
 neither made nor intended any unkind allusion to religious men or 
 religious truth, but whose discoveries have led them to the presenta- 
 tion of views whicli, marking an advance in scientific conceptions, 
 involve, perhaps, some changes in the outward form of conceiving 
 certain Scriptural statements. Instead of calm and fearless inquiry, 
 they are met with stern and positive denunciation. Instead of look- 
 ing to see what new and valuable expansion of even our Scriptural 
 conceptions may be found, many religious men at once raise the cry 
 of infidelity, and force the unhappy investigator of nature into a posi- 
 tion of hostility which he never designed to assume. I myself was 
 never moi'e surprised than on finding the magnificent generalizafion 
 of the Unity and Convertibility of Material Forces assailed on charges 
 of this kind. Generation after generation this process has gone on, 
 from the time of Galileo till to-day. Astroiiomy and geology have 
 by this time come nearly through the conflict in triumph. Physics 
 and zoology are now in the thick of the fight. The next genera- 
 tion will see them left in possession of the field ; but, alas, will the 
 battle be still raging along some farther line, or may we hope for a 
 better day 1 The best minds in the Christian Church lament this 
 state of things most deeply. It is but a week ago since an honored 
 minister of the Presbyterian body expressed this strong regret and 
 anxiety in a conversation with me, mourning over the unwise and 
 hasty opposition which drives men of science into an unsought atti- 
 tude of estrangement. 
 
 Then, too^, apart from direct censure or criticism, there is a slur- 
 ring, contemptuous mode of speech tow^ard science, frequently 
 indulged in by some writers, which is as unwise as it is unfair. 
 Science is taunted with its frequent changes of views; as if any 
 advancing knowledge must not, of necessity, so alter. Then there 
 is the stock argument of the dissensions and disagreements among 
 the expounders of science, as rendering the whole matter doubtful 
 
16 University Convocation. 
 
 and trivial ; jnst as though every department of human thought, — 
 history, philosophy, political economy, and last, but not least, reli- 
 gion, evangelical or other, — did not present the same spectacle, of 
 men united in the possession of certain fundamental principles, but 
 differing widely in their application to details. No one complains 
 more frequently, or more justly, of the unfairness of this objection, 
 than do religious teachers when it is* urged by unbelievers as an 
 excuse for neglecting the Gospel. But it is equally unfair in the 
 other application, and should never be used by candid thinkers, 
 however convenient it may be in default of any better. It is a 
 sword which cuts only the hand that takes it. 
 
 All this is not only unfortunate, but useless ; not only useless, 
 but mischievous. Denunciation can always make enemies, but never 
 friends. Some of the ablest writers and thinkers of our day have 
 prejudiced and weakened their happiest efforts by a sharpness of man- 
 ner that stands in painful contrast to the truth, the dignity, and the 
 real fairness of their matter. Keligious critics must learn to separate 
 the spiritual truths of the Divine Gospel from the physical concep- 
 tions of creation gained from Milton's Paradise Lost. The image of 
 God, still the distinguishing glory of humanity, even in this fallen 
 state, must be recognized as in the spiritual character and not in the 
 bodily frame. Until this is done, at least so far as to allow for the 
 differing conceptions of workers in a different field, the strife must 
 go on unceasingly to the bitter end, — how bitter I dare not say. 
 
 But the remedy, gentlemen of the Convocation, lies with the 
 Christian educators of our country. If, along with an earnest spirit- 
 ual faith, they shall teach caution, patience, and kindliness, a true 
 and broad sympathy with the aims and methods of science, and the 
 charity which " thinketh no evil," we may hope for better things in 
 the days that shall come when our work is past. 
 
 But it will be said by some, that " the danger of a wide-spread 
 infidelity is becoming very great. Science threatens to undermine 
 all the foundations of faith. Shall we utter no warning and venture 
 no reproof V I reply, the greatest danger, by far, is that which arises 
 from these very tendencies on which I have dwelt. The foundations 
 of faith have suffered nothing from the adoption of scientific views 
 which, in times past, were deemed just as dangerous as these which 
 are now so dreaded. The Copernican astronomy, the ages of geology, 
 the nebular hypothesis, have but expanded vastly our conceptions of 
 the Creative power and wisdom, and left the spiritual energy of the 
 Gospel purer than before, because less involved with unrelated physi- 
 
Christian Educators and Modern Science. 17 
 
 cal ideas. Why, then, should the doctrine of the conversion of force, 
 or of the development of species, awaken fears for the Christian 
 faith ? It is no new and strange ordeal through which it is called to 
 pass, this eliminating of certain outward forms in which, for a time, 
 it had been clothed. It is an experience which belongs to every age, 
 and is essential to the life and development of the world. Let me 
 not be misunderstood here. I do not speak of the spiritual, but of 
 the physical, elements in our religious ideas. One of the leading 
 American magazines for the coming month sounds this note of alarm 
 in a strenuous article, that seems not only excessive, but undiscrimi- 
 nating as to these very distinctions that are so fundamental. 
 
 Such anxieties arise from a want of confidence in the Divine order- 
 ing of human progress, and are unworthy of the calm assurance that 
 should be the mark, as it is the privilege, of every Christian believer. 
 It is ours to look forward, and not back, to the Golden Age, to rest 
 in joyful certainty of the coming of an era of wisdom, holiness, and 
 peace. Every past century, through all the storms of history, has 
 contributed to this result ; and as believers in the word of God, we 
 may not and cannot fear that His plans or promises shall fail. Our 
 way is plain and our duty is solemn. Let us, as guides and teachers 
 of youth, labor to impress upon their minds and hearts the inward 
 grounds of spiritual confidence. Let us warn them against the 
 timorous and doubting tendencies which go far to create the very 
 conflict which they so much dread. Let us teach them to love and 
 honor the work of science, and to base their faith on better and 
 broader foundations than any that can be shaken by historical or 
 physical discovery. The principles of the Gospel — ruin by nature, 
 atonement by Christ, salvation by faith in Him — are eternal and 
 unchangeable as He from whom they come ; but the forms and 
 vehicles in which they are received must change with the changes of 
 human thought and progress. " Let us not, therefore, judge one 
 another any more, but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling- 
 block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother's way." 
 
 It is difficult, however, for men to change conceptions, which are 
 deeply planted in their minds, and associated, however needlessly, 
 with great and cherished truths. The liberal and progressive man of 
 to-day becomes the conservative and the reactionist of to-morrow. 
 Thus it is well and wisely ordered that " the workmen die, but the 
 work goes on." Nay, it must be so, that the work may go on. Let 
 us follow fearlessly the advance of truth, seeking, in all these strifes 
 and collisions, " the things which make for peace ;" and when at 
 2 
 
18 Ujsiversity Convocation, 
 
 length we grow into the mental, as into the physical, rigidity of age, 
 and can no longer keep up with the march of thought and knowledge, 
 instead of doubting or despairing as to the result, let us leave the 
 work to abler and stronger laborers, trusting the future of humanity 
 to Him who " fainteth not neither is weary " in all the succession 
 of ages ; and let us rejoice that He, who has planned and guided 
 all the laws and all the stages of the world's long epochs of deve- 
 lopment, will remove us from a sphere wherein our usefulness is 
 ended, to a renewed condition, of power, energy, and purity, in the 
 kingdom of His Son. 
 
Vr»