Dr. Molloy has, in the present work, made an important contribution to a department of scientific and theologic literature, which has already been enriched by the labors of several other Catholic Fathers, among whom must be mentioned Cardinal Wiseman,1 Father Perrone,2 and Father Pianciani,3 who, in Italy, maintain substantially, the same ground which, in England, has been sustained by Dr. Chalmers, Dr. Buckland, Pye Smith, and Hugh Miller, and we may now add with pleasure, by Dr. Molloy. Names which, in the United States, find their counterparts in Dr. Hitchcock, Prof. Silliman, Prof. A. Guyot, Dr. Thompson, and J. D. Dana.

Reviewing the progress of opinion touching the relations of Science to Revealed Religion, it is noteworthy that while many Protestant theologians and writers on both sides of the Atlantic have, until a recent period, treated the discoveries of science, and especially of Geology, so far as they affect theological dogmas, in a manner, if not of contempt, at least of distrust or unfairness: on the contrary, the Romanist writers who have discussed these themes, have done so, generally, in a spirit of broad catholicity well calculated to command the respect it merits. They have shown no sensitiveness or timidity lest, perchance, their exegesis might be disturbed by candidly admitting the changes demanded by the discoveries of Science.

The author’s discussion of the principles of Geology evinces much familiarity both with the science and what is equally important, the necessities of the unscientific reader. He has presented, in the second part of his book, an interesting review, infused by copious quotations from the Christian Fathers, from the time of St. Augustine, showing that long before Geology had any existence as a science, and of course, when the discussions and doubts it has excited were unknown, the essential points respecting Time and the order of Creation had received careful attention from devout thinkers, and that the conclusions at which they arrived, on purely theological grounds, were, in most cases, much the same as those which the best writers of our time deduce from Geological evidence.

It is now thirty-five years since (1835) Cardinal, then Dr. Wiseman, delivered in Rome, before the English College, of which he was the head, his Lectures, already referred to, on the connection between Science and Religion, in the fifth and sixth of which he considers more particularly the Geological argument. The spirit of these lectures was a just rebuke to the narrow bigotry of such writers as Mr. Croly, Fairholm, and Granville Penn, as well as certain American theologians, who, by means of arrogance and denunciation, sought to silence the voice of truth, as proclaimed in the language of discovery, announcing the nature and the extent of those changes in life and in physical development which are recorded in the Genesis of the Rocks, because they conceived these immutable truths must of necessity conflict with the Genesis of Moses; the real conflict being only with their narrow interpretations. With rare moral courage Dr. Wiseman grappled with the great questions discussed so well in his lectures, at a time when there prevailed, with reference to such themes, a very wide-spread distrust, even among men of moderate opinions. In fact, the candor and courtesy displayed by Dr. Wiseman in his lectures, presents an enviable contrast to the acrimony of many theologians, and worthy of all praise, and in harmony with the learning and good taste which characterize his writings.

Dr. Molloy is a worthy disciple of the same school, and we are glad to find in him the same candor and liberality which it is certainly to be hoped he will receive at the hands of those who may differ from him. His geological arguments and illustrations are very naturally drawn, chiefly from British authorities. It is evident that the condition of opinion upon these matters among religious teachers and readers in Great Britain is less advanced than it is in this country or in continental Europe. Our author has obviously but little familiarity with the American literature of this subject. The similarity in some parts of his book both in thought and style with the writings on this subject of the late Professor Silliman, of Yale College, is quite noticeable. He has obviously not seen the writings of Dr. Hitchcock, of Guyot, of Dana, and of other American writers. We have therefore by the kind permission of the author reproduced in this edition the chapter on Cosmogony from Professor Dana’s Manual of Geology.4 The views set forth, in a very condensed form, in this chapter, embrace also the ideas of Professor Arnold Guyot, of Princeton, as presented by him in his unpublished lecture upon the same subject.

American readers will remember also that Professor Dana has discussed this subject much more at length in a series of papers published in the Bibliotheca Sacra,5 in a review of Dr. Tayler Lewis’s Six Days of Creation.6 It is greatly to be desired that Professor Dana should soon make a revised edition of his various writings upon this subject, a work which would be received with interest on both sides of the Atlantic.

We do not propose here to present the bibliography of this subject with any completeness, but we desire to mention, to those who have not seen it, a little volume of excellent spirit by Dr. Jos. P. Thompson, of New York, entitled Man in Genesis and Geology,7 which discusses chiefly the relations of man to creation, in seven lectures, the first of which is an “Outline of Creation in Genesis.” Even as we write another small volume on this subject comes to hand under the title of Chemical History of the Six Days of Creation,8 by Mr. John Phin, which also contains the substance of a series of lectures delivered by the author, who handles his theme in a spirit equally reverential and scientific, and well calculated to do good.

Those who desire to know the best exposition of this subject at the hands of a modern theologian will read the first part of Dr. Lange’s Genesis, or the First Book of Moses,9 in Dr. Tayler Lewis’s translation, pp. 159-177. The candid and scholarly spirit of the learned authors of this work indicates a marked change in discussions of this nature when compared with similar literature of the last generation.

These few suggestions, chiefly on the American literature of this subject, are offered in the belief that some readers may be glad to know where to turn for similar discussions, while Dr. Molloy will certainly not misinterpret our kindly intentions in suggesting to him some contemporary sources of information to most of which he very probably had no means of access when his excellent work was prepared.

July, 1870.