XT.] ME. DARWIN'S CRITICS. 257 



who would not be disturbed by the thorough demon- 

 stration of his theory. Nay, they would not even be 

 in the least painfully affected at witnessing the genera- 

 tion of animals of complex organization by the skilful 

 artificial arrangement of natural forces, and the pro- 

 duction, in the future, of a fish by means analogous to 

 those by which we now produce urea. 



" And this because they know that the possibility of 

 such phenomena, though by no means actually foreseen, 

 has yet been fully provided for in the old philosophy 

 centuries before Darwin, or even centuries before Bacon, 

 and that their place in the system can be at once as- 

 signed them without even disturbing its order or marring 

 its harmony. 



" Moreover, the old tradition in this respect has never 

 been abandoned, however much it may have been ignored 

 or neglected by some modern writers. In proof of this, it 

 may be observed that perhaps no post-mediseval theologian 

 has a wider reception amongst Christians throughout the 

 world than Suarez, who has a separate section 1 in op- 

 position to those who maintain the distinct creation of 

 the various kinds or substantial forms of organic life " 

 (pp. 1921). 



Still more distinctly does Mr. Mivart express himself, 

 in the same sense, in his last chapter, entitled " Theology 

 and Evolution " (pp. 302-5). 



" It appears, then, that Christian thinkers are perfectly 

 free to accept the general evolution theory. But are 

 there any theological authorities to justify this view of 

 the matter? 



" Now, considering how extremely recent are these 



biological speculations, it might hardly be expected ^ 



priori that writers of earlier ages should have given 



expression to doctrines harmonizing in any degree with 



1 Suarez, Metaphysica. Edition Vives. Paris, 1868, vol. i. Disput. XT. 2. 



H S 



