v MR. DARWIN'S CRITICS 143 



he was provided with a rational soul, he must, in 

 accordance with the elementary requirements of 

 the philosophy in which Mr. Mivart delights, have 

 possessed a distinct sensitive and vegetative soul, 

 or souls. Hence, when the " breath of life " was 

 breathed into the manlike animal's nostrils, he 

 must have already been a living and feeling 

 creature. But Suarez particularly discusses this 

 point, and not only rejects Mr. Mivart's view, but 

 adopts language of very theological strength 

 regarding it. 



"Possent praeterea his adjungi argumenta theologica, ut est 

 illud quod sumitur ex illis verbis Genes. 2. Formavit Deus 

 hominem ex limo- terras et inspiravit in faciem ejus spiraculwn 

 vitcc et foetus est homo in animam viventem : ille enim spirittis, 

 quam Deus spiravit, anima rationalis fuit, et PER EADEM FACTUS 



EST HOMO VIVENS, ET CONSQUENTEK, ETIAM SENTIENS. 



" Aliud est ex VIII. Synodo General! quse est Constantinopol- 

 itana IV. can. 11, qui sic habet. Apparet quosdam in tantum 

 'impietatis venisse ut homines duos animas habere dogmatizent : 

 tajis icjitur impietatis inventores et similes sapientes, cum Vetus 

 et Novum Testamentum omnesque Ecclcsim patres unam animam 

 rationalem hominem habere asseverentj Sancta et universalis 

 Sy nodus anathematizat." 1 



Moreover, if the animal nature of man was the 

 result of evolution, so must that of woman have 

 been. But the Catholic doctrine, according to 

 Suarez, is that woman was, in the strictest and 

 most literal sense of the words, made out of the 

 rib of man. 



1 Disput. xv. " De causa formali substantial!," x. No. 24. 



