To ascertain precisely in what form the forces of Christianity existed and how they might be applied to nineteenth century life, became early in the nineteenth century the problem on which the best thought of the time was concentrated.  Coleridge’s unshaken conviction that it was solvable, inspired many with courage.  Whately, Arnold, Schleiermacher, Bunsen, Ewald, Newman, Hare, Milman, Thirlwall and many others, approached it from different directions.  The spirit of scientific investigation that was in the air was applied with reverent hands, but with unsparing resolve to ascertain the exact truth.  The investigation was no longer confined to dogma; a proof text from the Bible was no longer sufficient to close a controversy.  The Bible itself must be subjected to investigation.  This was indeed going to the foundations.  There was a wild outcry against rationalism and iconoclasm, but the search for truth and fact went on.  As in a siege, the garrison must sometimes destroy with their own hands outworks which cannot be successfully defended, and may be made a vantage ground for the enemy, so the defenders of Christianity set themselves to the task of finding out how much of the current theology was credible and tenable, and how much might wisely be abandoned, to insure the safety of the remainder.  The discoveries of Geology, Astronomy and of Biology could not be denied, yet their testimony was contrary to Christian doctrine.  “The world was made in six natural days,” said the old Christian preacher.  “The world was thousands of years in the making,” said the geologist.  The preacher appealed to his Bible, the geologist appealed to the rocks.  The issue was fairly joined, and in the early years of the century it seemed as if there was no alternative but that of believing the Bible and denying science, or believing science and giving up the Bible; it seemed impossible to believe both.  When the scientific theologian ventured to suggest that the word “day,” might mean age, or period, there was another outcry that the Bible was being surrendered to the enemy.  But it was realized that the message of the Bible to the world was not scientific, and that its usefulness was not impaired by the suggested mode of understanding its record of creation; and gradually the surrender was accepted.  It is true that to this day there are some who will not accept it, as there is at least one preacher who insists, on the authority of the Bible, that “the sun do move,” but the number diminishes in every generation.  A beginning was made in attaining the true view of the Bible which led further and has not yet reached its limits.  Having admitted that the Bible was not given to teach science the Church has to decide whether it can admit the theory of evolution and whether its records of history are authoritative.  These questions are so fundamental that the strife of Calvinism and Arminianism and the question of the double procession of the Holy Spirit, which seemed vital to our fathers have faded into relative insignificance.