{ 
126 MR. DARWIN’S CRITICS ae 
shame, by the bright example of Catholic freedom 
from the trammels of verbal inspiration. 
_ I regret to say that my anticipations have been 
cruelly disappointed. But the extent to which 
my hopes have been crushed can only be fully 
appreciated by citing, in the first place, those 
passages of Mr. Mivart’s work by which they were 
excited. In his introductory chapter I find the 
following passages :— 
“The prevalence of this theory [of evolutioll 
need alarm no one, for it is, without any doubt, 
perfectly consistent with the strictest and most 
orthodox Christian? theology ” (p. 5). | 
“Mr. Darwin and others may perhaps bal 
excused if they have not devoted much time to 
the study of Christian philosophy ; but they have 
no right to assume or accept without careful ex- 
amination, as an unquestioned fact, that in that 
philosophy there is a necessary antagonism 
between the two ideas ‘ creation’ and ‘evolution,’ 
as applied to organic forms. 
“‘ It is notorious and patent to all who choose to 
seek, that many distinguished Christian thinkers — 
have accepted, and do accept, both ideas, ¢.e. both 
‘creation’ and ‘ evolution.’ 
“As much as ten years ago an eminently 
Christian writer observed : ‘ The creationist theory 
does not necessitate the perpetual search after 
1 It should be observed that Mr. Mivart employs the term 
‘* Christian” as if it were the equivalent of ‘‘ Catholic.” 
