CHRISTIANITY AND EVOLUTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19527, 9 July 1925, Page 7

CHRISTIANITY AND EVOLUTION

A REINFORCEMENT OF CHRISTIAN FAITH. ADDRESS TO STUDENTS. Though the controversy regarding Christianity and Evolution has raged for well over half a. century, there still remains a vast amount of misunderstanding and confused thinking on the subject. Not only in America but in our own country the mere mention of evolution is calculated to rouse heated argument in many circles, and jvst now the discussion seems to be particularly live. It was with a view to clarifying thinking on the subject and clearing away some needless difficulties that Dr J. E. Holloway, lecturer on botany at Otago University, last night addressed a meeting of the Student Christian Union in the Allen Hall on “Christianity and Evolution.” The president of the union, Mr W. J. Scott, presided over a large attendance, and the meeting opened with devotional exercises. Dr Holloway began by making three quotations, one from High Miller, the Scottish geologist: “It is impossible for a man to be a believer in evolution and a Christian.” The speaker totally disagreed with that idea, and said that we had moved far since the times in which Hugh Miller lived. W. J. Bryan declared; “Thp doctrine of evolution asserts that the Bible is a lie.” That was simply not a fact. On the contrary, evolution showed that there was wonderful significance and truth in the Bible that we had tended to ovelook. A third writer said: “Evolution cannot be proved anyhow.” That, might be true, but in the sense in which the writer meant it neither could anything else bo proved. The speaker believed that Paul wrote the letters commonly, attributed to him, but that could never be proved now in the sense implied in the quotation. Whereas the relation of evolutionary teaching to Christianity was at first largely negative and destructive, we had now reached tho time when evolutionary teaching was constructive and strengthening tho bonds of true religion. A certain superstructure in tho course of 1800 years had boon built up round the Gospel taught by Our Lord. That was only natural. There were certain essentials on which all branches of the Christian Church agreed, and it was regarding tho added superstructure that they disagreed. One effect of evolutionary teaching nad been to make clear the line between essentials and non-essentials, and in doing so it had vastly helped the church, for this was a service which the church could hardly have rendered itself. In the broadest sense of all the spirit of science and of religion were very much tho same. They were both after truth and had tho pursuit of truth as their one and oulv goal. Evolutionary (ruth had shown us that human ideas and words are very limited after all. The general effect had been to give us a fur bigger and clearer idea of creation than wo would otherwise have had. “Cocksuroncss” was far from tho spirit of true science. This wider view of tho creation gave humility and reverence. No human word could over hope to express properly superhuman things. Modern secionce taught us to be very humble in the use of words. Words were simply parables and symbols though they wore also treasure houses of truth. We did need to learn tho lesson that perfect love casteth out fear./ If a man stood firm in his belief in God ho would welcome light from any quarter. There was no room for fear in the well-established Christian. History was full of instances of now ideas being howled down because men wore afraid and did not like to have their minds stretched. The inspiration of tho Rible y-qb ono of tho biggest crucial questions of all. At first there was a clashing between the new evolutionary theory and Genesis, but it had gone on much further now, and scientific teaching demanded the broadening of all religious conceptions. He believed that the Holy Spirit, tho Spirit of Youth, moved tho minds of men. How did Ho move the minds of men? There were two theories about that. One was that He moved them mechanically,. God used men as if they were a pen. Tho other idea ’was that Ho used men taking account of their own personalities and the times in which they lived. That was a different kind of inspiration. It was a more rational view, and there was no half and half way between tho two ideas. There was a saying in the New Testament that tho spirit of tho prophets was subject to the prophets, and it followed from that that tho inspiration of different parts of tho Bible differed in quality and degree. The effect of the teaching of evolution had been to force the Christian Church to say exactly what it meant bv inspiration. He did notthink anything'else would have forced the Church to do that. Tho CShuxch spoke with many voices. Of course it did. They were so many men with so many opinions, and as philosophers they would not have it otherwise Wo wore reaching the stage when scientists could charge the churches with literalism and materialism. Ho had seen often how the false crude materialism had tamed away seme of tho best men and women from the Church. Evolution was compelling them to say whether certain Old Testament stones were to bo taken literally or as parables. A parable was rot something ' untrue or unworthy, but was rich in tmth. Our Lord spoke m parables. Evolutionary teaching had done an immense amount of good and would eventually strengthen Christian faith. It had helped us to distinguish between tho spirit and tho letter.