• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. THE 'BATTLE' BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION OVER EVOLUTION IN NINETEENTH CENTURY NEW ZEALAND A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History at Massey University JOHN STENHOUSE 1985 MASSEY UNIVERSITY l..t (a) g�'<re perm1ss1on for my thesis, entitled to be made available to readers in the Library undertheconditions d€termined by theLihrariai:l.. (b) I agree to my thesis, if asked for anotherby institut.i.o� :;n"ay on temporary loan under conditions determinedby the Librarian. (c) I also agree that my thesismay he copied wrLibraryUS€. 2. * I do not wish my thesis, entitled .�.tr�. �JMtk/.. ....�h . ..$.� .. .M!!: . &tffl.ih. .()l.lrt: . ...� �� ... Ji. ...N� . ... �. ..N.¥. .. �/...... to be made available to readers or to be sent to other institutions without my written consent within the next two years. Signed .. ...@..� ..................... Date .. .%..�� ...�9.� ............... * Strike out the sentence or phrase which does not apply. The Library Massey University Palmerston North, N.Z. The copyright of this thesis belongs to the author. Readers must sign their name m the space below to show that they recognise this. They are asked to add their permanent address. Name and Address Dat e MASSEY UNIVEftSfTY Abstract This thesis describes and anal yses the New Zealand response to the Darwinian theory of evolution in the second half of the nineteenth century. Traditional accounts, using a distorted version of the Huxley-Wilberforce debate as their model, have been triumphalist, positivistic, and mil itaristic. The bloody 'battle' between science and religion , according to these received views , resulted in the overwhe lming victory of science, truth, and progress over religion , ignorance, and superstition. This model is inapplicable in the New Zeal and context. Generations of reconciling Genesis with geol ogy had prepared the Christian mind well for coming to terms with scientific discoveries, and adjusting interpretations of Scripture accordingly. After an initial period of caution and deliberation, churchmen within the major denominations came to terms with �iological evolution as readily as they had earlier accepted the findings of geol ogy and palaeontol ogy. By the 1880's evolution became acceptable to most educated Christians. Scientists too,quickly accepted biological evolution but remained religious believers, and in many cases devout, practising Christians. Their religious view of nature was reinforced rather than destroyed by Darwin. The handful of freethinkers who procl aimed that Science had suppl anted Christianity also belie the positivist model, for evolution became for them a surrogate religious faith. Science did effectively become secularized by the beginning of the twentieth century, but this was the work of devout scientists who wanted to prevent religious controversy from constantly ho lding back the progress of biology. The 'battle' between science and religion over evolution culminating in the final and decisive triumph of science was a myth. ii Preface I would like to record my thanks to all those who have been so hel pful over the last three years. Dr Peter Lineham has been all that I could ask of a chief supervisor, and more. His never-failing enthusiasm, constant help with sources, insightfu l criticism and sympathetic counsel have put me permanently in his debt. I am gratefu l to all the members of the Massey University Department of History who have provided such a stimulating and congenial atmosphere to work in. Dr Kerry Howe has been a very friendly and approachable assistant supervisor. He has constantly helped me to keep the 'magnum opus' in a healthy perspective! Thanks to Professor W.H. Oliver for helping to supervise the initial stages of the thesis. Professor J.C. Davis and Dr David Thomson have provided valuable comments and criticisms. I would like also to acknowledge ideas and references from Professor Ian Breward, Professor G.S. Parsonson, Professor M.P.K. Sorrenson, Professor George Marsden , Sir Charles Fleming, Roger Chapman, Philip Fleming, and my father, Dr David Stenhouse, who has proved adept at clarifying complex zoological and phil osophical issues over the phone. Special thanks to my brother David who was a great help in the final stages . I must also mention the libraries which have been consulted, in particular: the Alexander Turnbull Library, the Wellington University Library, The Massey University Library, the Palmerston North Public Library, the Canterbury Public Library, the Methodist Church Archives (Christchurch); the Hocken Library, the Dunedin Public Library, the Knox College Library, the Auckland Institute and Museum Library, the St. Johns College Library, the Leys Institute Library (Auckland) , the iii Auckland Public Library, the New Zeal and Baptist College Library, and the Cambridge University Library. A number of librarians and archivists deserve special mention: David MacDonald of the Hocken Library, Marcia Baker (Methodist Church Archivist) , Kathleen Col eridge of the Victoria University Library, Ian Thwaites of the Auckland Institute and Museum Library, Judith Bright of the St. Johns Col l ege Library and Peter Gautrey of the Cambridge University Library. Finally I would like to thank all those who have made the last three years so marvellous: especially my own family, John and Jill McLellan, the members of Hokowhitu Baptist Church, the ladies at Manawatu St, and my flatmates - Aleck, Steve, Mark, and Paul - who have tolerated my enthusiasms with extraordinary good humour, in the knowledge, I suspect, that in my case they were witnessing a classic Darwinian case of reversion to the ancestral type. iY CONTENTS Page Abstract ii Preface iii Contents V Abbreviations vi Introduction 1. Science and Religion Before the Origin 10 2. The 1860's: The Phony vl ar? 34 3. The 1870's: Trends in Science 82 4. The 1870's: Religious Responses to Evolution 125 5. The 1880's: Freethought, Evolution and the Churches 166 6. The 1890's: The Secularization of Science and 219 the Emergence of Fundamentalism Conclusion 274 Notes and References 281 Bibliography 312 Abbreviations CG Church Gazette DNZB Dictionary of New Zealand Biography FR Freethought Review JHB Journal of the History of Biology JRH Journal of Religious History LT Lyttelton Times NZE New Zealand Evangelist NZH New Zealand Herald NZJH New Zealand Journal of History NZJS New Zealand Journal of Science New Zealand Magazine NZ Meth New Zealand Methodist NZP New Zealand �resbyterian NZYl New Zealand Ylesleyan ODT Otago Daily Times TPNZI Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute Library Symbols AP Auckland Public Library AR Auckland Institute and Museum Library CP Canterbury Public Library Du :Ho Hocken Library, Dunedin i-lTu Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington wv vi Introduction : The Historiography of the Darwinian Debates The famous debate between T.H. Huxley and Bishop 'Soapy Sam' Wilberforce at the Oxford meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1860 has epitomized for many people the relations between religion and science in the nineteenth century. Wilberforce concluded an attack on Charles Darwin's recently published The Or igin of Species by asking Huxley whether it was on his grandmother's or his grandfather's side that he cl aimed descent from the ape. Huxley turned to the scientist sitting beside him and remarked softly, 'The Lord hath deli vered him into mine hands.' He rose, defended the Darwinian theory with quiet gr avity, and concluded by observing that he would rat her be descended from an honest ape than from a man who abused both talents and position in the service of falsehood and religious prejudice. Thus was launched the career of the world's first 1 self-styled episcopophage. This episode, incorpor ated uncritically into historical writing, has given rise to a mythology of astonishing proportions. The debate itself has generally been depicted as the triumph of scientific truth over religious bigotry and obscurantism. William Irvine asserts that 'Huxley committed fo rensic murder with a wonderful artistic simplicity, grinding orthodoxy between the facts and the supreme Victorian value of truth-telling'.2 For the Danish historian Vilhelm Gronbech the debate was 'one of the great battles' of a war which 'ended in an overwhelming victory for science.13 In the opinion of Reginald Stackhouse the subsequent con flict between science and religion over evolution has fol lowed the lines of the Huxl ey-Hilberforce debate, with 'the champions of re ligion arguing against evolution not so much with scientific reasons as with appeals to the Bible, and deriding the advocates of evolution as infidels.14 These assertions prove the truth of Samuel Butler's dictum that 'God himself cannot remake history, but historians can.' On the Huxl ey-Wilber force debate itse lf Sheridan Gilley has pointed out that the 'official version' , on which all subsequent accounts have been based , was actually written by Huxley and Hooker , and was 1a wholly one-sided effusion from the winning side , put together long after the event, uncritical ly copied from book to book, and shaped by the hagiographic conventions of Victor ian life and letters'.5 David Oldroyd has pointed out that Wilberforce was not in fact a completely uni nformed obscur antist. Primed with scientific information by the eminent comparative anatomist Richard Owen , he success fu lly exposed real scientific weaknesses in Darwin's theory.6 As modern palaeontol ogist Martin Rudwick has pointed out , Darwin's emphasis on the imperfection of the fossil record to explain the absence of intermediate forms looked suspiciously like special pleading to those like Owen and Wilberforce who were acquainted with palaeontology.7 The received view of the Huxl ey­ Wil berforce debate is distorted.

Load more

  339

Copy Link