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. Hivart 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 prseterea his adjungi arguments theologica, ut est 

 illud quod sunritur ex illis verbis Genes. 2. Formavit Dcus 

 hominem ex Kino temx et inspiravit in faciem ejus spiraculum 

 vita: et factus est homo in animam viventem : ille enim spiritus, 

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



EST HOMO VIVENS, ET CONSQUENTER, ETIAM SENTIENS. 



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

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

 impictatis vcnisse ut homines duas animas habcrc doymatiz-';nt : 

 talis igitur impictatis invcniorcs et similes sapientcs, cum Vctus 

 et Novum Tcstamentum omncsque Ecclcsian patres unam animam 

 raiionalcm hominem habere as-.evercnt, Sancta et universalis 

 Sy nodus anathematized." 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 formal! substantial!," x. No. 24. 



