v MR. DARWIN'S CRITICS 141 



opinions at great length, and his final judgment 

 may be gathered from the following passage : 



" 35. Tertio dicendum est, hsec animalia omnia his diebus 

 producta esse, IN PEEFECTO STATU, IN SINGULIS INDIVIDUIS, SEU 

 SPECIEBUS SUIS, JUXTA UNIUSCUJUSQUE NATURAM .... 

 ITAQUE FUERTJNT OMNIA CREATA INTEGRA ET OMNIBUS STJIS 

 MEMBRIS PERFECT A." 



As regards the creation of animals and plants, 

 therefore, it is clear that Suarez, so far from 

 "distinctly asserting derivative creating," denies 

 it as distinctly and positively as he can ; that 

 he is at much pains to refute St. Augustin's 

 opinions ; that he does not hesitate to regard 

 the faint acquiescence of St. Thomas Aquinas in 

 the views of his brother saint as a kindly subter- 

 fuge on the part of Divus Thomas ; and that he 

 affirms his own view to be that which is supported 

 by the authority of the Fathers of the Church. 

 So that, when Mr. Mivart tells us that Catholic 

 theology is in harmony with all that modern 

 science can possibly require ; that " to the general 

 theory of evolution, and to the special Darwinian 

 form of it, no exception . . . need be taken on 

 the ground of orthodoxy;" and that "law and 

 regularity, not arbitrary intervention, was the 

 Patristic ideal of creation," we have to choose 

 between his dictum, as a theologian, and that 

 of a great light of his Church, whom he him- 

 self declares to be "widely venerated as an 



