THE SIMIAN ORIGIN OF MAN. 361 



One cannot help thinking, when one seriously 

 reflects on the matter, that the learned Cardinal 

 and what is said of him may be predicated of crea- 

 tionists generally unconsciously favors the very 

 notion he wishes to oppose. He wishes, above all 

 things, to safeguard the creative act and bring out 

 in bold relief the Divine attributes of wisdom and 

 omnipotence, but he unwittingly, it would seem, 

 makes greater demands than his case requires. In- 

 deed, it strikes me that those who hold the special 

 creation theory as to the body of the father of our 

 race, and the same may be said of believers in the 

 special creation of the forms of life below man, 

 constitute themselves defenders of the very theory 

 which the great St. Athanasius, full fifteen centuries 

 ago, felt called upon to criticise adversely. Argu- 

 ing against the anthropomorphic views which the 

 heathen entertained of the Almighty, he contended 

 that the God of the Christians is a Creator, not a 

 carpenter uriar^ of> Ts^vir^. In accord with the il- 

 lustrious Alexandrian Doctor's view, it has been 

 truthfully observed that : " The Great Architect 

 theory in theology is the analogue of the emboite- 

 ment theory in science. Both were invented when 

 mechanism dominated thought, and we have out- 

 grown both." 



In commenting on Mivart's theory, the erudite 

 Cardinal Archbishop of Seville manifests his charac- 

 teristic liberality and breadth of view, strikingly re- 

 sembling in this respect his immortal master, the 

 Angel of the School. "As the question stands at 

 present," he says, " we have no right to reprobate or 



