COMMENTS BY PROFESSOR HEXRY DRUMMOXD. 809 



predia Britannica." But that it does not inform us on these practical 

 matters is surely a valid argument why we should not expect it to 

 instruct the world in geology. Mr. Huxley is particular to point out 

 to us that the bat and the pterodactyl must be classified under the 

 "winged fowl" of Genesis, while at a stretch he believes the cock- 

 roach might also be included. But we should not wonder if the narra- 

 tor did not think of this. 



Scientific men, apparently, need this warning, not less than those 

 whom they punish for neglecting it. How ignorantly, often, the 

 genius of the Bible is comprehended by those who are loudest in their 

 denunciations of its positions otherwise, is typically illustrated in the 

 following passage from Haeckel. Having in an earlier paragraph 

 shown a general harmony between the Mosaic cosmogony and his own 

 theory of creation, he proceeds to extract out of Genesis nothing less 

 than the evolution theory, and that in its last and highest develop- 

 ments : 



Two great and fundamental ideas, common also to the non-miracnlous theory 

 of development, meet us in this Mosaic hypothesis of creation with surprising 

 clearness and simplicity — the idea of separation or differentiation, and the idea 

 of progressive development or perfecting. Although Moses looks upon the 

 results of the great laws of organic development ... as the direct actions of a 

 constructing Creator, yet in his theory there lies hidden the ruling idea of a pro- 

 gressive development and a differentiation of the originally simple matter.* 



With the next breath this interpreter of Genesis exposes "two 

 great fundamental errors " in the same chapter of the book in which 

 he has just discovered the most scientific phases of the evolution hy- 

 pothesis, and which lead him to express for Moses "just wonder and 

 admiration." What can be the matter with this singular book ? Why 

 is it science to Haeckel one minute and error the next ? Why are 

 Haeckel and Mr. Huxley not agreed, if it is science? Vrhy are 

 Haeckel and Mr. Gladstone agreed, if it is religion ? If Mr. Huxley 

 does not agree with Haeckel why does he not agree with Mr. Gladstone ? 



George MacDonald has an exquisite little poem called "Baby's 

 Catechism." It occurs among his children's pieces : 



"Where did you come from, haby dear ? 

 Out of the everywhere into here. 



Where did you get your eyes so blue? 

 Out of the sky as I came through. 



Where did yon get that little tear? 

 I found it waiting when I got here. 



Where did you get that pearly ear? 

 God spoke, and it came out to hoar. 



How did they all just come to be yon? 

 God thought about me and so I grew. 



* Haeckel, " History of Creation," vol. i, p. 38. 



