Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2009
TheBattleLines in the evolution controversy had been clearly drawn by the year 1890. In scientific circles a few die-hards, like the German zoologist, Virchow, were making a last ditch fight against the increasingly popular Darwinian concept. American scientists, however, were virtually unanimous in their acceptance of evolution now that the restraining hand of Louis Aggassiz had been lifted. Among the theologians too might be found liberals who embraced the new theory; such influential Protestant preachers as Henry Ward Beecher and Lyman Abbott announced that they were “enthusiastic evolutionists.” Most Protestant leaders did not share this enthusiasm. They remained skeptical of evolution's scientific merits, suspicious of its philosophical implications, and fearful of its theological effects. Perhaps the most common Protestant technique was to denounce Darwinism as a threat to Christianity. Thus, as matters stood, America was in the midst of a struggle between a school of evolutionists, many of whom espoused unchristian or antichristian philosophies, and another group of anti-evolutionists who denied the scientific validity of evolution and objected to its theological implications. The evolutionists seemed to be gaining in strength and numbers.
1 Agassiz died in 1873. Prior to his passing, his great prestige had apparently inhibited the enthusiasm of many scientists for the new theory. After his death scientific acceptance of evolution proceeded very rapidly, and the theory made more progress in America than in Europe. Loewenberg, Bert J., “The Impact of the Doctrine of Evolution on American Thought, 1859–1900,” pp. 52–53, 66–67, unpublished doctoral dissertation, undated, in the library of Harvard UniversityGoogle Scholar.
2 Hofstadter, Richard, Social Darwinism in American Thought 1860–1915 (Philadelphia, 1945), pp. 15–17Google Scholar.
3 Roberts, Windsor Hall, The Reaction of American Protestant Churches to the Darwinian Philosophy 1860–1900 (Chicago, 1938), p. 6Google Scholar; Loewenberg, Bert J., “The Controversy over Evolution in New England, 1859–1873,” New England Quarterly, VIII (06, 1935), 234–236, 241Google Scholar; “As Regards Bishop Coxe,” Popular Science Monthly, X (11, 1876), 108Google Scholar.
4 Brownson's views may be gleaned from Henry Brownson, F., ed., The Works of Orestes A. Brownson (20 vols., Detroit, 1882–1907), IX, 491–492, 495–496Google Scholar; Mivart's ideas were expounded in “The Evolution of Life,” Catholic World, XVII (05, 1873), 145–157Google Scholar; a typically moderate approach was offered in “The Origin and Mutability of the Species,” Catholic World, I (09, 1865), 851Google Scholar.
5 “God of Advanced Science,” Catholic World, XXVI (11, 1877), 253Google Scholar; Brownson, , Works, IX, 482Google Scholar.
6 Garesche, F. P., Science and Religion: The Modern Controversy (St. Louis, 1876), pp. 8–9Google Scholar.
7 “Dr. Draper and Evolution,” Catholic World, XXVI (03, 1878), 782Google Scholar; “God of Advanced Science,” Catholic World, XXVI (11, 1877), 251Google Scholar.
8 “Three Lectures on Evolution,” Catholic World, XXIV (02, 1877), 632Google Scholar.
9 “God of Advanced Science,” Catholic World, XXVI (11, 1877), 253Google Scholar.
10 “Dr. Talmadge on Evolution,” Fortnightly Review, V (09 1, 1898), 4Google Scholar.
11 Hughes, Thomas, “Anthropology: A Historical Sketch,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVIII (07, 1893), 620, 626–627Google Scholar.
12 Wyman, H. H., “Modern Science and the Catholic Faith,” Catholic World, LXXI (04, 1900), 5Google Scholar; Cabanis, , “A Plea for Evolution,” Fortnightly Review, V (09 29, 1898), 7Google Scholar; Preuss, Arthur, “Darwin's Unprovable Theory,” Fortnightly Review, V (09 29, 1898), 3Google Scholar; Fox, James J., “Thomas Henry Huxley,” Catholic World, LXXII (03, 1901), 798Google Scholar.
13 “Christianity and Positivism,” Catholic World, XIV (10 1871), 2–3Google Scholar.
14 For brief biographies of Robert and William Seton, see the Dictionary of American Biography, XVI (New York, 1935), p. 598Google Scholar.
15 Ibid., 598.
16 “Living Catholic Men of Science,” Catholic World, LXVI (03, 1898), 859Google Scholar.
17 Seton, William, “Darwinism on Its Deathbed,” Catholic World, LXXX (12, 1904), 357Google Scholar.
18 Seton, William, “Geographical Distribution in Natural History,” Catholic World, L (10, 1889), 620–630Google Scholar.
19 Seton, William, “Disguises in Nature,” Catholic World, L (03, 1890), 767Google Scholar.
20 Ibid., 774.
21 Seton, William, “The Hypothesis of Evolution,” Catholic World, LXVI (11, 1897), 201Google Scholar.
22 Seton, William, “Ancient Mammals and Their Descendants,” Catholic World, LX (12, 1894), 401–403Google Scholar; “The Museum of the Rocks,” Catholic World, LXI (06, 1895), 404Google Scholar.
23 Seton, William, “How to Solve One of the Highest Problems of Science,” Catholic World, LVIII (03, 1894), 788Google Scholar; “Hypothesis of Evolution,” Catholic World, LXVI (11, 1897), 202–204Google Scholar.
24 Seton, , “Highest Problems of Science,” Catholic World, LVIII (03, 1894), 788Google Scholar; “The American Museum of Natural History,” Catholic World, LXIII (04, 1896), 21Google Scholar.
25 Seton, William, “The Study of Geology and the Summer School, Catholic World, LVI (03, 1893), 761Google Scholar.
26 Seton, William, A Glimpse of Organic Life: Past and Present (New York, 1897), p. 25Google Scholar.
27 Seton, , “Darwinism on Its Deathbed,” Catholic World, LXXX (12, 1904), 348–349Google Scholar; “Divine Action in Natural Selection,” Catholic World, LXX (02, 1900), 625Google Scholar.
28 Muckermann, Hermann, “Natural Selection or Organic Evolution?” Fortnightly Review, XII (01 15, 1905), 19–20Google Scholar.
29 Cabanis, , “Fallen in Love with Darwin,” Fortnightly Review, V (08 25, 1898), 3Google Scholar.
30 William Seton to Rev. John A. Zahm, July 3, 1899. This letter is among the Zahm Papers located in the Archives of the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
31 Seton, William, “The Century's Progress in Science,” Catholic World, LXIX (05, 1899), 164Google Scholar; “Hypothesis of Evolution,” Catholic World, LXVI (11, 1897), 198Google Scholar; “Highest Problems of Science,” Catholic World, LVIII (03, 1894), 788Google Scholar.
32 Seton, , “Hypothesis of Evolution,” Catholic World, LXVI (11, 1897), 204Google Scholar.
33 New YorkFreeman's Journal, 09 17, 1898, 4Google Scholar.
34 Ibid., July 30, 1898,4.
35 Ibid., August 6, 1898, 4.
36 Ibid., September 3, 1898, 4; July 30, 1898, 4; October 29, 1898, 5;
37 Ibid., September 17, 1898, 4; November 12, 1898, 5; August 6, 1898, 4.
38 Ibid., November 26, 1898, 5.
39 See, for example, Hewit, Augustine F., “Review of Tanquerey's Dogmatic Theology,” Catholic World, LX (02, 1895), 619–620Google Scholar.
40 For Mivart's views see his article on “The Evolution of Evolution,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XX (10, 1895), 673–692Google Scholar; among the articles which quoted Mivart in rebuttal were: Bezimie, , “The Arrogance of Empiricism,” Fortnightly Review, VI (05 8, 1899), 69Google Scholar; Gabanis, , “In Love with Darwin,” Fortnightly Review, V (08 25, 1898), 2Google Scholar.
41 Muckermann, , “Natural Selection,” Fortnightly Review, XII (01 15, 1905), 20Google Scholar.
42 Bezimie, , “Arrogance of Empiricism,” Fortnightly Review, VI (05 8, 1899, 69Google Scholar. The churchman was Rev. Salvatore Brandi, S.J., editor of the Civilta CattolicàaGoogle Scholar.
43 Loc. cit.
44 Seton to Zahm, July 3, 1899; “Catholic Men of Science,” Catholic World, LXVI (03, 1898), 858–859Google Scholar.
45 Brady, E. B., “Christian Anthropology,” Catholic World, LV (07, 1892), 541–542Google Scholar; Pohle, Joseph, “Darwinism and Theism,” Ecclesiastical Review VII (10, 1892), 163–164Google Scholar; Dwight, Thomas, “Matter and Form in Biology,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVII (07, 1892), 462Google Scholar; StMivart, George, “What Makes a Species?” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XXIII (01, 1898), 28–29Google Scholar; Searle, George M., “Evolution and Darwinism,” Catholic World, LVI (11, 1892), 228Google Scholar. There was of course no rejection of Scholasticism by these authors, but simply a demand that it be harmonized with the established results of scientific research.
46 Thein, John, Christian Anthropology (New York, 1892), p. 10Google Scholar.
47 Mivart, , “Evolution of Evolution,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XX (10, 1895), 692–697Google Scholar.
48 Orban, A., “Transformism: Lamarck-Darwin,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVI (04, 1891), 296Google Scholar; Thein, , Christian Anthropology, p. 87Google Scholar; Brady, , “Christian Anthropology,” Catholic World, LV (07, 1892), 545Google Scholar; Pohle, , “Darwinism and Theism,” Ecclesiastical Review, VII (09, 1892), 171–172Google Scholar.
49 Searle, , “Evolution and Darwinism,” Catholic World, LVI (11, 1892), 225, 227–228Google Scholar.
50 Hewit, , “Review of Tanquerey's Dogmatic Theology,” Catholic World, LX (02, 1895), 619–620Google Scholar.
51 Hewit, Augustine F., “The Warfare of Science,” Catholic World, LIII (08, 1891), 685Google Scholar.
52 Orban, , “Transformism,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVI (04, 1891), 293Google Scholar; Searle, , “Evolution and Darwinism,” Catholic World, LVI (11, 1892), 226Google Scholar; Brady, , “Christian Anthropology,” Catholic World, LV (07, 1892), 543Google Scholar.
53 , C. R., “Herbert Spencer's Life-Work,” Fortnightly Review, III (01 28, 1897), 3Google Scholar.
54 Searle, , “Evolution and Darwinism,” Catholic World, LVI (11, 1897), 223, 226Google Scholar.
55 Ibid., 227; Hewit, , “Review of Tanquerey's Dogmatic Theology,” Catholic World, LX (02, 1895), 620Google Scholar; Thein, , Christian Anthropology, 130–131Google Scholar.
56 Pohle, , “Darwinism and Theism,” Ecclesiastical Review, VII (09, 1892), 161Google Scholar.
57 Ibid., 171; Vaughan, John S., “What Nature Says of Its Creator,” Catholic World, LV (04, 1892), 2Google Scholar; Searle, , “Evolution and Darwinism,” Catholic World, LVI (11, 1892), 229Google Scholar; Dwight, , “Matter and Form in Biology,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVII (07, 1892), 462Google Scholar; Thein, , Christian Anthropology, 62–63Google Scholar; Orban, , “Transformism,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVI (04, 1891), 296Google Scholar. Typical of the views quoted from European authorities were these statements by Rev. Joseph Corluy and Rev. F. Vigoroux: “Darwinian Transformism is indeed contrary to the obvious sense of Scripture, but it cannot be said to be opposed to the sacred text itself; for Scripture is silent on the mode according to which the earth produced this diversity of species, whether it was suddenly or in the course of time; whether with an absolute or only with a relative fixity of species.” “Darwinism is not necessarily in contradiction with the Bible.… It can, therefore, be held, with the necessary restrictions, by believing scientists, as it is in fact by Mr. St. George Mivart and others.” Ibid., 294.
58 Ibid., 293; Vaughan, , “What Nature Says,” Catholic World, LV (04, 1892), 2Google Scholar.
59 Pohle, , “Darwinism and Theism,” Ecclesiastical Review, VII (09, 1892), 163, 171–172Google Scholar.
60 Orban, , “Transformism,” American Catholic Quarterly Review, XVI (04, 1891), 292–293Google Scholar; Vaughan, , “What Nature Says,” Catholic World, LV (04, 1892), 10Google Scholar; Pohle, , “Darwinism and Theism,” Ecclesiastical Review, VII (09, 1892), 171Google Scholar.
61 Ibid., 164–165; Searle, , “Evolution and Darwinism,” Catholic World,LVI (11, 1892), 224.Google Scholar
62 “A Distinguished Catholic Scientist on Evolution,” Fortnightly Review, IX (06 12, 1902), 359–362Google Scholar.
63 “Dr. O'Toole in His Own Defense,” Fortnightly Review, XXXIII (03 1, 1926), 106Google Scholar.
64 Catholic Encyclopedia, V, 654–655.
65 “Ideals of Science and Faith,” Catholic World, LXXX (02, 1905), 676Google Scholar.
66 Cavanaugh, John, “Father Zahm,” Catholic World, GXIV (02, 1922), 582Google Scholar.
67 New YorkFreeman's Journal, 11 12, 1898, p. 5Google Scholar; Seton, , “Progress in Science,” Catholic World, LXIX (05, 1899), 164Google Scholar; “Study of Ge ology,” Catholic World, LVI (03, 1893), 761Google Scholar; “Divine Action,” Catholic World, LXX (02, 1900), 625,–629Google Scholar; “A Plan in the History of Nature,” Catholic World, LXXI (05, 1900), 376Google Scholar; “Problems of Science, Catholic World, LVIII (03, 1894), 787Google Scholar.
68 Seton, , Glimpse of Organic Life, p. 116Google Scholar.
