Зображення сторінки

which took place in the production of the bodies of other animals, and of the whole material universe.

Of course if it can be demonstrated that that difference of which Mr. Wallace asserts the existence, does really exist, it is plain that we then have to do with facts not only harmonizing with religion, but, as it were, preaching and proclaiming it.

It is not, however, necessary for Christianity that any such view should prevail. Man, according to the old scholastic definition, is "a rational animal” (animal rationale), and his animality is distinct in nature from his rationality, though inseparably joined, during life, in one common personality. Man's animal body must have had a different source from that of the spiritual soul which informs it, owing to the distinctness of the two orders to which those two existences severally belong.

Scripture seems plainly to indicate this when it says: “God made man from the dust of the earth, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.” This is a plain and direct statement that man's body was not created in the primary and absolute sense of the word, but was evolved from pre-existing material (symbolized by the term “dust of the earth"), and was therefore only derivatively created, i.e. by the operation of secondary laws. His soul, on the other hand, was created in quite a different way, not by any pre-existing means, external to God himself, but by the direct action of the Almighty, symbolized by the term " breathing :” the very form adopted by Christ, when conferring the supernatural powers and graces of the Christian dispensation, and a form still daily used in the rites and ceremonies of the Church.1

1 Since the first edition of this work appeared, its author has had the satisfaction of meeting with the following passage :—"Man was made

[ocr errors]

That the first man should have had this double origin agrees with what we now experience. For supposing each human soul to be directly and immediately created, yet each human body is evolved by the ordinary operation of natural physical laws.

Professor Flower, in his Introductory Lecture 1 (p. 20) to his course of Hunterian Lectures for 1870, observes : “Whatever man's place may be either in or out of nature, whatever hopes or fears or feelings about himself or his race he may have, we all of us admit that these are quite uninfluenced by our knowledge of the fact that each individual man comes into the world by the ordinary processes of generation, according to the same laws which apply to the development of all organic beings whatever; that every part of him which can come under the scrutiny of the anatomist or naturalist has been evolved according to these regular laws from a simple minute ovum, indistinguishable to our senses from that of any of the inferior animals. If this be so—if man is what he is, notwithstanding the corporeal mode of origin of the individual man, so he will assuredly be neither less nor more than man, whatever may be shown regarding the corporeal origin of the whole race, whether this was from the dust of the earth, or by the modification of some pre-existing animal form.”

Man is indeed compound, in him two distinct orders of being impinge and mingle; and with this composite nature

rational, after he was made corporeal. * The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul' (Gen. ii. 7). Here are two acts on the part of the Creator—the forming the dust, and the breathing the life.” (See Sermons bearing on Subjects of the Day, by John Henry Newman, D.D.; New Edition. Rivingtons, 1869. Sermon viii. p. 101.)

1 Published by John Churchill.

and subsumes the laws of inorganic matter. Similarly the actions of animal life depend upon and subsume the laws of organic matter. In the same way the actions of a self-conscious moral agent, such as man, depend upon while they subsume the laws of animal life. When a part or the whole series of these natural actions is altered or suspended by the intervention of action of a still higher order, we have then a “miracle.”

From the foregoing observations we seem to find a perfect harmony in the double nature of man, his rationality making use of and subsuming his animality; his soul arising from direct and immediate creation, and his body being formed at first (as now in each separate individual) by derivative or secondary creation, through natural laws. By such secondary creation, i.e. by natural laws, for the most part as yet unknown but aided by “Natural Selection," all the various kinds of animals and plants have been manifested on this planet. That Divine action has concurred and concurs in these laws we know by deductions from our primary intuitions; and physical science, if unable to demonstrate such action, is at least as impotent to disprove it. Disjoined from these deductions, the phenomena of the universe present an aspect devoid of all that appeals to the loftiest aspirations of man, all that stimulates his efforts after goodness, and presents consolations for unavoidable shortcomings. Conjoined with these same deductions, all the harmony of physical nature and the constancy of its laws are seen unimpaired, while the reason, the conscience, and the aesthetic instincts are alike gratified. We have thus a true reconciliation of science and religion, in which each gains and neither loses, one being complementary to the other.

Some apology is due to the reader for certain observations and arguments which have been here advanced, and which have little in the shape of novelty to recommend them. But, after all, novelty can hardly be predicated of the views here criticised and opposed. Some of these seem alniost a return to the fortuitous concourse of atoms” of Democritus, and even the very theory of “Natural Selection” itself—a “survival of the fittest” —was in part thought out not hundreds but thousands of years ago. Opponents of Aristotle maintained that by the accidental occurrence of combinations, organisms have been preserved and perpetuated such as final causes, did they exist, would have brought about, disadvantageous combinations or variations being speedily exterminated. · For when the very same combinations happened to be produced which the law of final causes would have called into being, those combinations which proved to be advantageous to the organism were preserved; while those which were not advantageous perished, and still perish, like the minotaurs and sphinxes of Empedocles.” 1

In conclusion, the author ventures to hope that this treatise may have contributed, however slightly, towards clearing the way for peace and conciliation and for a more ready perception of the harmony which exists between the deductions from our primary intuitions and the teachings of physical science, so far, that is, as concerns the evolution of organic formsthe genesis of species.

The aim has been to support the doctrine that these i Quoted from the Rambler of March 1860, p. 364 : ""Onou mèv olv άπαντα συνέβη άσπερ κάνει ένεκά του εγίνετο, τούτα μεν σώθη από του αυτομάτου συστάντα επιτηδείως, όσα δε μή ούτως απώλετο και απόλλυται, καθι πεο Εμπεδοκλής λέγει τα βουγενή και ονδρόπρωρα.-ARIST. Phys. ii.

c. 8.

species have been evolved by ordinary natural laws (for the most part unknown) aided by the subordinate action of “Natural Selection,” and at the same time to remind some readers that there is and can be absolutely nothing in physical science which forbids them to regard those natural laws as acting with the Divine concurrence and in obedience to a creative fiat originally imposed on the primeval Cosmos, “in the beginning,” by its Creator, its Upholder, and its Lord.

« НазадПродовжити »