and
theology leads him to keep a retreat open by the proviso that he
cannot 'consent to test the truth of Natural Science by the Word
of Revelation,' but for all that he devotes pages to the
exposition of his conviction that Mr. Darwin's theory
'contradicts the revealed relation of the creation to its
Creator,' and is 'inconsistent with the fulness of His glory.'"

In a footnote to this passage, Huxley wrote that he was not aware when
writing these lines that the authorship of the article had been avowed
publicly. He adds, however:

"Confession unaccompanied by penitence, however, affords no
ground for mitigation of judgment; and the kindliness with which
Mr. Darwin speaks of his assailant, Bishop Wilberforce, is so
striking an exemplification of his singular gentleness and
modesty, that it rather increases one's indignation against the
presumption of his critic."

As a matter of fact Wilberforce was a man of no particular information
in letters or in philosophy, and his knowledge of science was of the
vaguest: a little natural history picked up from Gosse, the naturalist
of the seashore, in the course of a few days' casual acquaintance at
the seaside, and some pieces of anatomical facts with which he was
provided, it is supposed, by Owen, for the purposes of the review. But
he bore a great name, and misused a great position; he was a man of
facile intelligence, smooth, crafty, and popular, and in this case he
was convinced that he was doing the best possible for the great
interests of religion by authoritatively denouncing a man whose
character he was incapable of realising, and on whose work he was
incompetent to pronounce an opinion. Against an enemy of this kind,
Huxley was implacable and relentless. He was constitutionally
incapable of tolerating pretentious ignorance, and he had realised
from the first that there could be no question of giving and taking
quarter from persons who were more concerned to suppress doctrines
they conceived to be dangerous than to examine into their truth. On
the other hand, much as Huxley disliked Owen's devious ways, and
although in after life there occurred many and severe differences of
opinion between Huxley and Owen, Huxley had a sincere respect for much
of Owen's anatomical and palaeontological work, and when, in 1894,
Owen's _Life_ was published, one of the most interesting parts of it
was a long, fair, and apprecia