THE EVOLUTION IDEA 129 



here reviews the opinions of Philo and Augustine 

 upon these questions and distinctly rejects them. 

 He suggests that the failure of Aquinas to con- 

 trovert Augustine's interpretation arose from his 

 deference to the authority of Augustine, and he 

 maintains that the 'day' of Scripture was a nat- 

 ural day of twenty-four hours, not a period of 

 time as Augustine considered it; he further de- 

 clares that the entire work of Creation took place 

 in the space of six solar days. Huxley concludes : 



As regards the creation of animals and plants, 

 therefore, it is clear that Suarez, so far from dis- 

 tinctly asserting derivative creation, denies it as dis- 

 tinctly and positively as he can; that he is at much 

 pains to refute St. Augustin's opinions ; that he does 

 not hesitate to regard the faint acquiescence of St. 

 Thomas Aquinas in the views of his brother-saint as 

 a kindly subterfuge on the account of Divus Thomas ; 

 and that he affirms his o^\Tl view to be that which is 

 supported by the authority of the Fathers of the 

 Church. 



Mivart replied^ to Huxley that while Suarez 

 rejected Augustine's view as to the fact of crea- 

 tion, he testifies as to the validity of the princi- 

 ples on which the doctrine of derivative creation 

 reposes. Yet Mivart is not able to controvert 

 Huxley's exposition of Suarez's real opinions; he 



iMivart: Lessons from Nature, 1876, p. 447. 



