REFLECTIONS AND CONCLUSION. 415 



creation by the operation of secondary causes. We 

 may not, indeed, be prepared to assert with Naudin, 

 that " the cosmogony of the Bible from the begin- 

 ning to the end is but an Evolution theory, and that 

 Moses is the ancestor of Lamarck, Darwin and all 

 modern evolutionists," but we can certainly affirm, 

 as Canon Hamard points out, that the Sacred Text 

 favors Transformism when understood in a theistic 

 sense " le texte sacrd favorise a certains egardsla these 

 transformiste entendue dans un sens spiritualiste. 1 " 



Surprising as it may seem, two of the most 

 pronounced advocates of the Evolution theory, are 

 the very ones who are most impressed with the re- 

 markable harmony between the Genesiac account of 

 creation and the teachings of Evolution. Thus, 

 Romanes admits that " the order in which the flora 

 and fauna are said by the Mosaic account to have 

 appeared upon the earth, corresponds with that which 

 the theory of Evolution requires and the evidence of 

 geology proves." a Haeckel, however, is even more 

 explicit in his explanations. " Two great funda- 

 mental ideas," he says, " common also to the non- 

 miraculous, meet us in the Mosaic hypothesis of 

 creation, with surprising clearness and simplicity ; 



1 See " Dictionnaire Apologetique de la Foi Catholique," 

 par M. 1'Abbe J. B. Jaugey, col. 3093. Further on the distin- 

 guished canon expresses himself as follows: "Nous conclu- 

 rons seulment, de quelques considerations que nousvenons d 'eb- 

 aucher, que la Bible laisse une egale liberte aux transformistes et 

 aux partisans des creations successives. Ainsi regrettons-nous 

 de la voir mise en cause a ce sujet. Toutes les fois qu'elle n'est 

 point absolument explicite et il nous semble que c'est le cas 

 on s'expose, en invoquant son autorite, a la compromettre et a 

 compromettreavec elle la cause religieuse dont elleest le soutien." 



S C. Nature, Aug., 1881. 



