St. George Jackson MivartFRS (30 November 1827 – 1 April 1900) was an English biologist. He is famous for starting as an ardent believer in natural selection and later becoming one of its fiercest critics. Mivart attempted to reconcile the theory of evolution as propounded by Charles Darwin with the beliefs of the Catholic Church but was condemned by both Darwin and the Church.[1] His belief in a soul created by God and insistence that evolutionism was not incompatible with the existence of such a God brought him into conflict with other evolutionists, while his theological theories on hell and on the compatibility between science and Catholicism led him to clash with the Church.[2]
Mivart was born in London. His parents were Evangelicals, and his father was the wealthy owner of Mivart's Hotel (now Claridge's). His education started at the Clapham Grammar School, and continued at Harrow School and King's College London. Following his conversion to Catholicism, he was instructed at St. Mary's, Oscott (1844–1846), and was confirmed there on 11 May 1845. His conversion automatically excluded him from the University of Oxford, then open only to members of the Anglican faith. His mother followed him into the Catholic Church in 1846.[3]
In 1851 he was called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn, but he devoted himself to medical and biological studies. In 1862 he was appointed to the chair in zoology at St. Mary's Hospital medical school. In 1869 he became a fellow of the Zoological Society of London, and in 1874 he was appointed by Mgr Capel as Professor of Biology at the short-lived Catholic University College, Kensington, a post he held until 1877.[4][5]
He was vice-president of the Zoological Society twice (1869 and 1882); Fellow of the Linnean Society from 1862, secretary from 1874 to 1880, and vice-president in 1892. In 1867 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society for his work "On the Appendicular skeleton of the Primates". This work was communicated to the society by Thomas Henry Huxley. Mivart was a member of the Metaphysical Society from 1874. He received the degrees of Doctor of Philosophy from Pope Pius IX in 1876, and of Doctor of Medicine from the University of Louvain in 1884.[6]
Mivart met Huxley in 1859, and was initially a close follower and a believer in natural selection. "Even as a professor he continued to attending Huxley's lectures ... they became close friends, dining together and arranging family visits."[1] However, Huxley was always strongly anti-Catholic, and no doubt this attitude led to Mivart becoming disenchanted with him. Once disenchanted, he lost little time in reversing on the subject of natural selection. In short, he now believed that a higher teleology was compatible with evolution.
As to "natural selection", I accepted it completely and in fact my doubts & difficulties were first excited by attending Prof. Huxley's lectures at the School of Mines.[1]
Even before Mivart's publication of On the Genesis of Species in 1871, he had published his new ideas in various periodicals.[7] Huxley,[8]Lankester, and Flower had come out against his ideas, although O'Leary (2007) reports that "their initial reaction to Genesis of Species was tolerant and impersonal".[9]
Though admitting evolution in general, Mivart denied its applicability to the human intellect (a view also taken by Wallace). His views as to the relationship between human nature and intellect and animal nature in general were given in his books Nature and Thought[10] and Origin of Human Reason.[11][5]
Mivart was someone Darwin took seriously; Darwin prepared a point-by-point refutation which appeared in the sixth edition of Origin of Species. One of Mivart's criticisms to which Darwin responded was a perceived failure of natural selection to explain the incipient stages of useful structures. Taking the eye as an example, Darwin was able to show many stages of light sensitivity and eye development in the animal kingdom as proof of the utility of less-than-perfect sight (argument by intermediate stages). Another was the supposed inability of natural selection to explain cases of parallel evolution, to which Huxley responded that the effect of natural selection in places with the same environment would tend to be similar.
Mivart's hostile review of the Descent of Man in the Quarterly Review aroused fury from his former intimates, including Darwin himself, who described it as "grossly unfair". Mivart had quoted Darwin by shortening sentences and omitting words, causing Darwin to write: "Though he means to be honourable, he is so bigoted that he cannot act fairly."[12] Relationships between the two men were near breaking point. In response, Darwin arranged for the reprinting of a pamphlet by Chauncey Wright, previously issued in the US, which severely criticised Genesis of Species. Wright had, under Darwin's guidance, clarified what was, and was not, "Darwinism".[12]: 353–356
The quarrel reached a climax when Mivart lost his usual composure over what should have been a minor incident: In 1873, George Darwin (Charles' son) published a short article in The Contemporary Review suggesting that divorce should be made easier in cases of cruelty, abuse, or mental disorder. Mivart reacted with horror, using phrases like "hideous sexual criminality" and "unrestrained licentiousness". Huxley wrote a counter-attack, and both Huxley and Darwin broke off connections with Mivart.[13] Huxley blackballed Mivart's attempt to join the Athenaeum Club.[12]: 355
In 1892 and 1893 Mivart published three articles on "Happiness in Hell" in the journal Nineteenth Century.[14] Mivart proposed that the punishments of hell were not eternal, and that hell is compatible with some kind of happiness.
These articles were placed on the Index Expurgatorius. This was the first official action of the Catholic Church against Mivart but it "had nothing to do either with evolution or science."[2] Later articles in January 1900 ("The Continuity of Catholicism" and "Scripture and Roman Catholicism" in The Nineteenth Century, and "Some Recent Catholic Apologists" in The Fortnightly Review) led to his being placed under interdictbyCardinal Vaughan. These last articles were written, by Mivart's own admission, in a provocative tone so that the authorities would have to act. In them, reversing his previous stance, he challenged the authority of the Church, concluding that the Bible and Catholic doctrine could not be reconciled with science.
"Without attempting to pass judgment on Mivart’s final stance, we can say that his attitude was not solely or principally determined by scientific motives and, more concretely, that evolution did not occupy a determining role in it."[2]
The report of the consultor of the Holy Office dealing with Mivart's case significantly does not mention evolution.[2]
Mivart died of diabetes in London on 1 April 1900. His late heterodox opinions were a bar to his burial in consecrated ground. However, Sir William Broadbent gave medical testimony that these could be explained by the gravity and nature of the diabetes from which he had suffered.[4]
After his death, a long final struggle took place between his friends and the church authorities. On 6 April 1900, his remains were deposited in catacomb Z beneath the Dissenters' Chapel, in the unconsecrated ground of the dissenters' section of the General Cemetery of All Souls, Kensal Green, in a public vault reserved for 'temporary deposits' (most of which were destined for repatriation to mainland Europe or the Americas).[15] His remains were finally transferred to St. Mary's Roman Catholic Cemetery, Kensal Green, on 16 January 1904, for burial there on 18 January 1904.
^ abcdMariano, Artigas (2006). Negotiating Darwin: The Vatican confronts evolution, 1877–1902. Glick, Thomas F.; Martínez, Rafael A. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 236 ss. ISBN9780801889431. OCLC213306043.
^Beolens, Bo; Watkins, Michael; Grayson, Michael (2011). "Mivart (p. 180)". The Eponym Dictionary of Reptiles. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. xiii, 180. ISBN978-1-4214-0135-5.
Brundell, Barry (2001). "Catholic Church politics and evolution theory, 1894–1902". The British Journal for the History of Science. 34 (1): 81–95. doi:10.1017/S0007087401004290. S2CID143687119.
Gruber, Jacob William (1960). A conscience in conflict: the life of St. George Jackson Mivart. Columbia University Press. OCLC923296584.
Root, John D. (1985). "The Final Apostasy of St. George Jackson Mivart". The Catholic Historical Review. 71 (1): 1–25. JSTOR25021980. ProQuest1290071732.
Swain, Emma E. (December 2017). "St. George Mivart as Popularizer of Zoology in Britain and America, 1869–1881". Endeavour. 41 (4): 176–191. doi:10.1016/j.endeavour.2017.03.001. PMID28669417.
This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Mivart, St George Jackson". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 18 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 628.
