The rapid development of geology in the first part of the Nineteenth
Century brought challenges to those who believed in the literal truth of The
Holy Bible. Lyell’s Principles of Geology,
published in three volumes from 1830-1833 [1] synthesised contemporary views on
the accumulation of different strata over very long time periods, with the
strata containing the fossilised remains of plants and animals. Clearly, the
Earth was more than 6000 years old, as maintained by Christian Creationists,
and believers were thus faced with a conflict that they needed to resolve.
In 1821, ten years before Lyell’s synthesis, W Welch of
Plymouth produced his Reliogiosa
Philosophia [2] and I am grateful to Dr Patrick Armitage of the Freshwater Biological
Association for suggesting that I would be interested in Welch’s work. I had no
knowledge of it before Patrick contacted me, although a copy is available as an
e-book. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find out anything about Welch
except that he lived in Stonehouse in Plymouth and believed in the truth of everything
written in The Holy Bible.
Reliogiosa Philosophia,
subtitled A new theory of the Earth; in
unison with the Mosaic account of Creation (thus the title of this blog post),
opens with its dedication to Sir Humphry Davy, the President of The Royal
Society (PRS):
Presuming on your well known
regard for, and patronage of, the Arts and Sciences, I have taken the liberty
to dedicate to you this first production of my pen, on a subject which has long
engaged the attention of Geologists.
Should the present work meet your
approval, it will afford me gratification, from a conviction that you would not
bestow your approbation, unless you conceived the conclusions I have drawn to
be founded on truth; and if my attempt to reconcile recorded facts in the book
of Nature with the history of Creation, as given by Moses, in the Sacred
Volume, prove successful, true religion and philosophy will be benefited; and
as they are derived from the same source, they should be united to promote the
same end.
I do not know how Davy responded to the book but, although
Welch’s thoughts on the formation of the Earth are imaginative, they are also
eccentric and it is unlikely that the PRS took them seriously.
Welch’s theory is this:
..by the power and word of the
Almighty, by the agency of fire, a union of the gases was effected, and which,
in a state of Nebula, uniting, formed
a globe of water, of much larger dimensions than the present earth, with its
seas, now only encompassing our shores. These gases contained and combined all
the principles of future matter.. ..a globe of water thus formed, became the
emporium, or grand magazine; a union of stony particles probably then took
place, which, when they became specifically heavier than the water, descended
from every part towards the centre, and formed a nucleus, whilst the stony
particles, in their descent, obtained from the diurnal motion, the form of a
spheroid..
..The nucleus being of a nature
suited to marine vegetation, plants were, by the creative power of the Deity,
first produced, suited to the wants of testaceous and crustaceous animals. From
these sources, I presume, the earth received its gradual increase:- that, in
proportion as vegetables and animals have been produced, the layers or strata
have been formed, and the waters lessened; and that, in the process of time,
the earth approached towards the surface of the waters, when the long confined
volcanic matter acquired a force superior to the resisting external pressure,
burst the hitherto unbroken globe, raised the Continents with the Mountains,
producing various phenomena..
Welch’s ideas on the formation of the Earth are summarised by an
illustration in his book (see above). In propounding these views, he provides
an explanation, albeit an extremely unlikely one, for the origin of the huge volume of water in the oceans covering so much of the Earth's surface: contemporary theories proposing that this water comes from comets, or from the release of water from crystalline
rocks. Like Welch, we don’t know.
The development of rock strata
described by Welch must have taken a lot longer than the few days demanded by the
account in Genesis. He addresses this point [2]:
It may.. ..be asserted by some
persons, that the Almighty could as easily have constructed our Globe at once,
and that the means here laid down are inadequate to the end. To the former I
reply, that it would be a species of blasphemy to doubt his power; but that the
point is, not what he could do, but what the book of Nature shews he has done;
and to the latter position, it will appear obvious.. .. that the production of
marine animals is incalculable, and that the myriads of millions in a globe of
water, and which the Creator abundantly filled, to produce and execute his
designs, by the shells cemented with decomposed plants making layers, and constantly
forming into rock, tending in every part to raise the bed of the Ocean.
This is confusing, as Welch is a believer in Creation, yet
appears to accept the idea of change over long periods of time – not of
evolution, but of the formation of rock strata with their associated fossils.
It certainly requires a lot of faith to accept the description given in Genesis.
Much of the rest of the book elaborates on Welch’s theory,
but he also gives us an Appendix that shows us the power of his imagination
[2]:
..we may safely infer, that the
Deity would not have provided the planets Jupiter, Saturn, and the Herschel, or Georgium Sidus, with moons,
(of no sort of utility to us,) unless he had intended to have placed beings on
those globes, possessed with the faculty of vision, and capable of receiving
and enjoying light, in a manner similar to ourselves; and it is more than probable, nay, it amounts
almost to a demonstration, that not only the planets in our system are
inhabited, but those in every other throughout the universe..
What is the basis for these assumptions? Is there any
statement in The Holy Bible to support this extraordinary view? Did each of these
myriads of planets, which had the same Creator, also have the same Jesus
Christ?
Welch’s views on planets are fantastic, but nothing compared to what he
has to say about the sun:
The Sun, which is evidently the
most glorious orb in our system, has been very generally supposed to be a globe
of fire; I shall, however, on this subject offer a few observations, and
conclude the present essay by endeavouring to illustrate that not only the
planets, but that our sun also, is probably the abode of intelligent and more
exalted beings..
..it may.. ..be reasonably
inferred, that the source of our day is surrounded with a luminous atmosphere,
suited by the Creator to his all-wise and beneficent purposes; and, that owing
to a break or opening, which at times occur, we are enabled to perceive a part
of his orb, and which, contrasted with the brilliancy of his luminous part,
appears black, demonstrating that it is not a body of fire; it is, therefore,
more than probable, that the sun is a suited habitation to superior and exalted
beings.
I had never considered “sun spots” in this way and I wonder
what Davy, and other readers grounded in science, made of Welch’s extraordinary
theories. How did he develop them? Did they stem from a threat to his religious
beliefs? I cannot answer these questions. However, it is worth pointing out
that currently accepted theories on the origin of the Universe may seem equally
preposterous in two hundred years’ time and we may have to accept that we will
never explain what we observe. That acceptance provides a niche that religions
exploit, yet it can be argued that religious explanations may be as valid as “scientific”
ones when dealing with the unknown. Welch, however, seems just a tad wild in
his metaphysical imaginings…
[1] Charles Lyell (1830 – 1833) Principles of Geology (three volumes). London, John Murray.
[2] W Welch (1821) Religiosa
Philosophia. Plymouth, W. Byers.
Many thanks to Patrick Armitage for suggesting that I would be
fascinated by Welch’s book – I certainly was, but probably not in the way that
Welch intended.
