Pili 
MR. DARWIN’S CRITICS 137 
“pro sua modestia subterfugere vim argumenti 
potius quam aperte Augustinum inconstantize 
__arguere.” 
Finally, Suarez decides that the writer of 
Genesis meant that the term “day” should be 
taken in its natural sense ; and he winds up the 
discussion with the very just and natural remark 
that “it is not probable that God, in inspiring 
Moses to write a history of the Creation which. 
was to be believed by ordinary people, would 
have made him use language, the true meaning o 
which it is hard to discover, and still harder to} 
believe.” ? 
And in chapter xii. 3, Suarez further ob- 
serves :— 
**Ratio enim retinendi veram significationem diei naturalis 
est illa communis, quod verba Scripture non sunt ad metaphoras 
transferenda, nisi vel necessitas cogit, vel ex ipsa scriptura 
constet, et maximé in historica narratione et ad instructionem 
fidei pertinente : sed hee ratio non minus cogit ad intelligendum 
proprié dierum numerum, quam diei qualitatem, QUIA NON 
MINUS UNO MODO QUAM ALIO DESTRUITUR SINCERITAS, IMO ET 
VERITAS HISTORIZ. Secundo hoe valde confirmant alia Scripture 
loca, in quibus hi sex dies tanquam veri, et inter se distincti 
commemorantur, ut Exod. 20 dicitur, Sex diebus operabis et 
_ facies omnia opera tua, septimo autem die Sabbatum Domini Dei 
} “Propter hee ergo sententia illa Augustini et propter nimiam 
obscuritatem et subtilitatem ejus difficilis creditu est: quia 
verisimile non est Deum. inspirasse Moysi, ut historiam de 
creatione mundi ad fidem totius populi adeo necessariam per 
homina dierum explicaret, quorum significatio vix inveniri et 
me ab aliquo credi posset.” (Zoe. cit. Lib. I. cap. xi. 
