Charles Darwin, on November 24, 1859, published a treatise that was destined to become the foundation of evolutionary biology. Its unabridged title, nonetheless, remains not only controversial, but politically incorrect: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. The science of biology has advanced considerably since 1859. Darwin knew nothing of molecular biology, for example. In retrospect, Darwin’s theory of chance leading to the evolution of species is as infantile as the theory of the atom as postulated by Democritus who lived from 460 to 370 BC.
No doubt Charles Darwin had occasion to cry. Had he submitted his tears to scientific analysis, however, he would have found yet another reason to believe that Divine Intelligence had an important role to play in biological evolution. In other words, had Darwin been more scientific, he would have realized that his own “scientific” theories were not all that scientific.
The tear is composed of three distinct layers. The outermost layer is oily and acts as a sealant that keeps tears from evaporating. The middle layer is aqueous and carries vitamins and minerals to the cornea. The third, and innermost layer, is mucous and helps the tear to coat and moisturize the eyes. There is no historical evidence that there were times when these layers had a different organization or contained different ingredients. Each layer does what is needed in order to keep the eye healthy. There is no evidence that they evolved by chance or natural selection. It is empirically evident, however, that they are ordered to health.
But the tear is even more subtle and wondrous. Tears contain different chemicals depending on how they were produced. The brain tells the eyes to produce just the right kind of tears for the right kind of purpose. Basal tears coat the eye on a day-to-day basis in order to keep them moisturized. Tears that result from eye irritation contain more healing properties than do the basal tears. They are also better suited to flushing foreign objects out of the eye. Emotional tears, associated with sadness, joy, or stress, carry more protein-based hormones than the other two types of tears and help the body to cleanse itself from the chemical side effects of pent-up emotions.
The theory that all of these intricate and appropriate chemical changes could have come about by chance is something that strains credulity. An Italian expression comes to mind: Non facciamo ridere i polli (Let’s not make the chickens laugh). Biological evolutionists have pointed out that most genetic mutations are actually negative in the sense that they are inappropriate or unsuitable for the organism. Human tears provide just the right chemical ingredients to perform the task that is needed. This cannot be merely the result of chance.
Aristotle stated that women cry more easily than do men. He was right. Science has shown that the lacrimal ducts of the female are larger than those of the male. At the same time, the arms of men are stronger than those of the female. The wisdom of this natural complementarity is obvious.
Whether or not Charles Darwin cried is really a moot point. Charles Dickens, on the other hand, not only cried, but was most grateful for the experience: “Heaven knows we need never be ashamed of our tears, for they are rain upon the blinding dust of earth, overlying our hard hearts. I was better after I had cried, than before — more sorry, more aware of my own ingratitude, more gentle.”
We might even say that tears can be the applause of the soul. For Edgar Allan Poe, “Beauty of whatever kind, in its supreme development, invariably excites the sensitive soul to tears.”
Let us say, then, that the ability to produce tears, whether to moisten the eye, flush out foreign particles, give us relief, or express gratitude, is a gift of God.
Thank God for tears. They cleanse our body as well as our mind and spirit.
+ + +
(Donald DeMarco is a senior fellow of Human Life International. He is professor emeritus at St. Jerome’s University in Waterloo, Ontario, and an adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College and Seminary in Cromwell, Conn., and a regular columnist for St. Austin Review. Some of his recent writings may be found at Human Life International’s Truth & Charity Forum.)
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress