"Critiques and Addresses"

by Professor Huxley. Macmillan; London.

IN the preface to this volume the author tell us that these critiques and addresses deal chiefly with educational, scientific, and philosophical subjects, and in fact indicate the high water mark of the various tides of occupation which have carried the author1 along since 1870 the year in which his " Lay Sermons," &c., were published. It is now the fashion with great men to write for the magazines and periodicals articles on subjects connected with their own speciality, and then have those articles reprinted in book form with such revisions and alterations as they deem necessary. In the case of men like Huxley, Tyndall, Proctor, and other thinkers of the same stamp, the practice is no likely to be injurious, but in minds belonging to an inferior mental grade it ought not to be commended. The world is full of worthless and uninteresting books already. And to add other to the list would be the unpardonable sin of literature....
These remarks are scarcely applicable to the volume before us, for the articles contained in that Volume are all thoughtfully written, and the subjects discussed in them are of great interest to philosophic thinkers. Whether we agree with the views of Professor Huxley or not we are sure to have our intellects sharpened by being brought into contact with him. He is one of the athletic thinkers of the age, and hence his writings always range far above the level of mediocrity.

The present volume is a collection of papers contributed to various journals, namely : The Academy, The Fortnightly and Contemporary Reviews, Good Words, and Macmillan's Magazine. The volume also contains the author's addresses to Learned Societies.

Professor Huxley's opinions on theological questions are well known. He is almost more out-spoken than Dr. Tyndall. The following passage from the article on Mr. Darwins' critics shows the views he holds in a very clear light:—

Catholic theology, like all theologies which are based upon the assumption of the truth of the account of the origin of things given in the Book of Genesis, being utterly irreconcilable with the doctrine of evolution, the student of science, who is satisfied that the evidence upon which the doctrine of evolution rests, is incomparably stronger and better than that upon which the supposed authority of the Book of Genesis rests, will not trouble himself further with these theologies, but will confine his attention to such arguments against the view he holds as are based upon purely scientific data—and by scientific data I do not merely mean the truths of physical, mathematical, and metaphysical science. For, by science, I understand all knowledge which rests upon evidence and reasoning of a like character to that which claims our assent to ordinary scientific propositions. And if anyone is able to make good the assertion that his theology rests upon valid evidence and sound reasoning, then it appears to me that such theology will take its place as a part of science.

The present antagonism between theology and science does not arise from any assumption by the men of science that all theology must necessarily be excluded from science ; but simply because they are unable to allow that reason and morality have two weights and two measures ; and that the belief in a proposition because authority tells you it is true, or because your wish to believe it, which is a high crime and misdemeanour when the subject matter of reasoning is of one kind, becomes under the " alias" of faith the greatest of all virtues, when the subject matter of reasoning is of another kind.

The Bishop of Brechin said well the other day:—"Liberality in Religion." I do not mean tender and generous allowances for the mistakes of others is only unfaithfulness to truth. And, with the same qualification. I venture to paraphrase the Bishop's dictum : Ecclesiasticism in science is only unfaithfulness to truth.

Elijah's great question, "Will you serve God or Baal? Choose ye," is uttered laudibly enough in the ears of every one of us as we come to manhood. Let every man who tries to answer it seriously ask himself whether he can be satisfied with the Baal of authority, and with all the good things his worshippers are promised in this world and in the next. If he can, let him, if he be so inclined, amuse himself with such scientific implements as authority tells him are safe, and will not cut his fingers ; but let him not imagine that he is, or can be, both a true son of the church or a loyal soldier of science.

And, on the other hand, if the blind acceptance of authority appears to him in its true colours, as mere private judgment in excelsis, and it he have the courage to stand alone, face to face, with the abyss of the Eternal and Unknowable, let him be content once for all not only to renounce the good things promised by Infallibility, but even to bear the bad things which it prophesies: content to follow reason and fact in singleness and honesty of purpose, wherever they may lead, in the sure faith that a hell of honest men will, to him, be more endurable than a paradise full of angelic shams.

 Australian Town and Country Journal 23 August 1873,