Delphi Complete Works of Samuel Butler, page 193
Let us look a little more closely at the ground which the Church of Rome and the Evolutionist hold in common. St. Paul speaks of there being “one body and one spirit,” and of one God as being “above all, and through all, and in you all.” Again, he tells us that we are members of God’s body, “of his flesh and of his bones;” in another place he writes that God has reconciled us to himself, “in the body of his flesh,” and in yet another of the Spirit of God “dwelling in us.” St. Paul indeed is continually using language which implies the closest physical as well as spiritual union between God and those at any rate of mankind who were Christians. Then he speaks of our “being builded together for an habitation of God through the spirit,” and of our being “filled with the fulness of God.” He calls Christian men’s bodies “temples of the Holy Spirit,” in fact it is not too much to say that he regarded Christian men’s limbs as the actual living organs of God himself, for the expressions quoted above — and many others could be given — come to no less than this. It follows that since any man could unite himself to “the flesh and bones” of God by becoming a Christian, Paul had a perception of the unity at any rate of human life; and what Paul admitted I am persuaded the Church of Rome will not deny.
Granted that Paul’s notion of the unity of all mankind in one spirit animating, or potentially animating the whole was mystical, I submit that the main difference between him and the Evolutionist is that the first uses certain expressions more or less prophetically, and without perhaps a full perception of their import; while the second uses the same expressions literally, and with the ordinary signification attached to the words that compose them. It is not so much that we do not hold what Paul held, but that we hold it with the greater definiteness and comprehension which modern discovery has rendered possible. We not only accept his words, but we extend them, and not only accept them as articles of faith to be taken on the word of others, but as so profoundly entering into our views of the world around us that that world loses the greater part of its significance if we may not take such sayings as that “we are God’s flesh and his bones” as meaning neither more nor less than what appears upon the face of them. We believe that what we call our life is part of the universal life of the Deity — which is literally and truly made manifest to us in flesh that can be seen and handled — ever changing, but the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever.
So much for the closeness with which we have come together on matters of fact, and now for the rapprochement between us in respect of how much conformity is required for the sake of avoiding schism. We find ourselves driven through considerations of great obviousness and simplicity to the conclusion that a man both may and should keep no small part of his opinions to himself, if they are too widely different from those of other people for the sake of union and the strength gained by concerted action; and we also find the Pope declaring of one of the brightest saints and luminaries of the Church that we need not follow him when it is plainly impossible for us to do so. Is it so very much to hope that ere many years are over the approximation will become closer still?
I have sometimes imagined that the doctrine of Papal Infallibility may be the beginning of a way out of the difficulty, and that its promoters were so eager for it, rather for the facilities it afforded for the repealing of old dogmas than for the imposition of new ones. The Pope cannot, even now, under any circumstances, declare a dogma of the Church to be obsolete or untrue, but I should imagine he can, in council, ex cathedra, modify the interpretation to be put upon any dogma, if he should find the interpretation commonly received to be prejudicial to the good of the Church: and if so, the manner in which Rome can put herself more in harmony with the spirit of recent discoveries, without putting herself in an illogical position, is not likely to escape eyes so keen as those of the Catholic hierarchy. No sensible man will hesitate to admit that many an interpretation which was natural to and suitable for one age is unnatural to and unsuitable for another; as circumstances are always changing, so men’s moods and the meanings they attach to words, and the state of their knowledge changes; and hence, also, the interpretation of the dogmas in which their conclusions are summarized. There is nothing to be ashamed of or that needs explaining away in this; nothing can remain changeless under changed conditions; and that institution is most likely to be permanent which contains provision for such changes as time may prove to be expedient, with the least disturbance. I can see nothing, therefore, illogical or that needs concealment in the fact of an infallible Pope putting a widely different interpretation upon a dogma now, to what a no less infallible Pope put upon the same dogma fifteen hundred, or even fifteen years ago; it is only right, reasonable, and natural that this should be so. The Church of England may have made no provision for the virtual pruning off of dogmas that have become rudimentary, but the Encyclical from which I have just quoted leads me to think that the Church of Rome has found one, and, in her own cautious way, is proceeding to make use of it. If so, she may possibly in the end get rid of Protestantism by putting herself more in harmony with the spirit of the age than Protestantism can do. In this case, the spiritual reunion of Christendom under Rome ceases to be impossible, or even, I should think improbable. I heartily wish that my conjecture concerning future possibilities is not unfounded.
Scientists have been right in preaching evolution, but they have preached it in such a way as to make it almost as much of a stumbling-block as of an assistance. For though the fact that animals and plants are descended from a common stock is accepted by the greater and more reasonable part of mankind, these same people feel that the evidence in favour of design in the universe is no less strong than that in favour of evolution, and our scientists, for the most part, uphold a theory of evolution of which the cardinal doctrine is that design and evolution have nothing to do with one another; the jar they raise, therefore, is as bad as the jar they have allayed.
It has been the object of the foregoing work to show that those who take this line are wrong, and that evolution not only tolerates design, but cannot get on without it. The unscrupulousness with which I have been attacked, together with the support given me by the general public, are sufficient proofs that I have not written in vain.
INDEX
ABORTION, neutralization of working bees an act of, 250
Accessory touches, varying Buffon on, 92
Accident, many of our best thoughts come thoughtlessly, 48, 384
—— profiting by, 51, 53
—— and discovery of theory connecting meteors with comets, 53
—— shaking the bag to see what will come out, 53
—— effects of, transmitted to offspring, Dr. Erasmus Darwin, 224
—— and design, the line between these hard to draw, 384
Accidental variations thrown for as with dice, 3
Accumulation of variations, C. Darwin deals with the, and not with the origin of, 340, 341
—— of small divergencies, Buffon on the, 103
Accurate, survival of fittest more accurate than Nat. Sel. and sometimes equally convenient, 9, 354, 365
Act of Parliament, Natural Selection compared to a certain kind of, 358
Age, old, the phenomena of, 67, 204, 381
Aggregation, the spirit of the age tends towards, 397, 398
Ahead, no organism sees very far, 44, 48, 54, 384
Aldrovandus, Buffon on the learned, 93
Alive, when we must not say that an animal is alive (to be retracted), 279
Allen, Grant, on ‘Evolution, Old and New,’ 386-388
—— on the decay of criticism, 388
—— calls Evolutionism “an almost exclusively English impulse,” 393
Alternations of fat and lean years, Buffon on, 125
Amœba, the, did not conceive the idea of an eye and work towards it, 43, 44, 384
Analogies, false, all words are apt to turn out to be, 365
Animals, contracts among, Dr. E. Darwin on, 205
Ape, the, and man, 90
Apes and monkeys, Buffon on, 153
—— and children fall on all-fours at the approach of danger, 312
Apparentibus, de non, et non existentibus, &c., 36
Appearances, rather superficial, our only guide to classification, 34, 35, 36, 198, 204
Appetency, Paley’s argument against the view that structures have been developed through, 22, 45
Aristides, C. Darwin as just as, 363
Aristotle denied teleology, 4
Artificial and real foot, differences between, 25
Asceticism, virtue errs on the side of excess rather than on that of, 35
Ass, the, and horse, Buffon’s pregnant passage on their relationship, 80, 90, 91, 100, 101, 142, 143, 155, 164, 311
Authority, a hard thing to weigh, 253
BACON, F., on evolution, 69
Balzac, quotation from, on memory and instinct, 67
Bark, Erasmus Darwin’s theory of, 208
Beaver, trowel incorporated into the beaver’s organism, 8
Bees, neutralization of working, an act of abortion, 250
Beetles, Madeira, Lamarck and C. Darwin’s views of their winglessness compared, 373, 380
Begin, How could the eye begin? 46, 47
Beginnings, of complex structures, a difficulty in the way of natural selection, 21, 22
—— difficulty of accounting for, 46, 47
—— a matter of conjecture and inference, 48
Behind, more moral to be behind the age than in front of it, 401
Best, making the best of whatever power one has, 50
Bird, how birds became web-footed, 48, 49, 51
—— a, will modify its nest a little, under altered circumstances, 55
—— Buffon on, 170, &c.
—— nests, Dr. Erasmus Darwin’s failure to connect the power to make them with memory, 201, 203
—— aquatic and wading, Lamarck on, 305
Bishop, and Evêque, common derivation of, 355
Blindfolded, we are so far, that we can see a few steps in front, but no more, 44
—— us, C. Darwin has almost ostentatiously, 346
Blindly, forces interacting blindly, 59
Body and mind, Lamarck on, 338, 339, 341
Brain, Lamarck had brain upon the brain, 36
—— Buffon on the, 131, 133, &c.
Brevity may be the soul of wit, but, &c., 315
Breeding, and feeding, 222
Brown-Séquard, his experiments on guinea-pigs’ legs, 303
Buds, individuality of, Dr. Erasmus Darwin on the, 207, 208
Buffalo, Buffon on the, 148, &c.
Buffon, profoundly superficial, 34
—— plus il a su, plus il a pu, &c., 44
—— dans l’animal il y a moins de jugement que de sentiment, 51
—— ignorance concerning, 61
—— memoir of, 74, &c.
—— on glory, genius, and style, 76, 77
—— ironical character of his work and method (see Irony), 78, &c., 171
—— on the ass, horse, and zebra, 80, 90, 91, 100, 101, 142, 143, 155, 164, 311
—— would not play the part of Rousseau or Voltaire, 81
—— Sir W. Jardine on, and the Sorbonne, 82
—— regards all animal and vegetable life as from one common source, 90
—— if a single species has ever been found under domestication, &c., 91
—— on plaisanterie, and the learned Aldrovandus, 93, &c.
—— his compromise, 92
—— accessory touches, 92
— — “especially” the same, 96
—— fluctuation of opinion an unfounded charge, 97, &c., 164
—— on the accumulation of small divergencies, 103
—— began preaching evolution almost on his first page, 104
—— chapter on the dégénération des animaux, equivalent to “on descent with modification,” 104, &c.
—— difference of opinion between him and Erasmus Darwin and Lamarck, 105
—— probably did not differ from Lamarck, 105
—— on direct action of changed conditions, 105, 145, 147
—— on man and the lower animals, 108
—— on classification, 108, 109, 141
—— on animals and plants, 109, 110
—— on reason and instinct, 110, 115
—— on final causes (the pig), 118, &c.
—— on hybridism, 117, 118
—— rudimentary organs, 120
—— on animals under domestication, 121, &c., 148
—— deals with these early, as giving him the best opportunities for illustrating the theory of evolution, 276
—— approaches natural selection in his “by some chance common enough in Nature,” 122
—— preaching on the hare when he should have preached on the rabbit out of pure love of mischief, 123
—— resumption of feral characteristics, 123
—— on the geometrical ratio of increase, 123, &c.
—— alternation of fat and lean years, 125
—— equilibrium of Nature, 125
— — “au réel,” 126
—— on violent death, 126
—— on sensation, 126, &c.
—— on the interaction of organ and sense, 127
—— the carnivora, 126
—— his criterion of what name a thing is to bear, 127
—— his criterion of perception and sensation, 127
—— on the unity of the individual, 127, 128
—— satirizes our habit of judging all things by our own standards, 129
—— the diaphragm, 129
—— on the stock and the diaphragm, 130
—— distinction between perception and sensation, 129, 130
—— on the meninges, 132
—— on the brain, 131, 133, &c.
—— on scientific orthodoxy and mystification, 138
—— on the relativity of science, 140
—— on nomenclature and knowledge, 141
—— on the genus felis, 143
—— on the lion and the tiger, 143, 145
—— on the animals of the old and new world, 145, &c.
—— on changed geographical distribution of land and water, 145, 164
—— on extinct species, 146
—— hates the new world, 146
—— on heredity and habit, 148, 159, 160, 161, 162
—— approaches Erasmus Darwin and Lamarck, re the Buffalo, Camel, and Llama, 148, 160, 161
—— on oneness of personality between parents and offspring, 151
—— on the organic and inorganic, 153, &c.
—— on apes and monkeys, 153, &c.
—— on the causes or means of the transformation of species, 159, &c.
—— on generic (as well as specific) differences, 164
—— on plants under domestication, 167
—— on pigeons and fowls, 169
—— on birds, 170, &c.
—— the assistance he rendered to Lamarck, 237, 258
—— Isidore Geoffroy’s failure to understand, 328
—— Colonel, 75
Bulk, a sine quâ non for success in literature or science, 315
Bull running, Tutbury, and Erasmus Darwin, 187
CAMEL, Buffon on the hereditary ills of the, 161
Cant, and rudimentary organs, 38
Captandum, all good things are done ad, 85
Carnivora, Buffon on the, 126
Carriage, Dr. Erasmus Darwin’s, 181
Cat, family, Buffon on the, 142, &c.
—— with a mane and long tail, 143
Cataclysms, the good cells that get exterminated during the cataclysms of our own development, 75
Catastrophes, Lamarck on, 277
Causes, or “means,” of modification, 301
—— C. Darwin says that Buffon has not entered on the, 104, &c.
—— C. Darwin gets us into a fog about, 345, &c.
Change, under changed circumstances, Mr. Patrick Matthew on, 318
Charity, the greatest of these is, 77
Church, a, like a second chamber, 400
—— the world better with than without, 400
—— should be like the fly-wheel of a steam engine, 104
Circonstances (see Conditions of Existence), Lamarck on, 268, 281
Circumstance, suiting power, a, Mr. Patrick Matthew on, 318-321
Classification, rather superficial appearances our best guide to, 34, 35, 36, 198, 204
—— Buffon on, 108, 109, 141
Clear, an ineradicable tendency to make things, 92
Clifford, Professor, on “Design,” 6, 7
Climbing plants, the movements of, Dr. Erasmus Darwin on, 209
Coherency, the persistency of ideas the best argument in support of their legitimate connection, 23
Coleridge, on “Darwinising,” 21
Common terms, our, involve the connection between memory and heredity, 201, 205
—— descent, the “hidden bond” of Lamarck, as also of C. Darwin, 271
Comparative anatomy, Lamarck on, 266, &c.
Complex structures, the incipiency of, a difficulty in the way of the natural selection view of evolution, 21, 22
Compromise, Buffon’s, 92
Conditions of existence, the very essence of condition involves that there shall be penalty in case of non-fulfilment, 352, 376, 377
—— and the winglessness of Madeira beetles, 373, &c.
—— according to C. Darwin, “include” and yet “are fully embraced by” natural selection, 355
—— identical with “natural selection,” 351-354
—— Étienne Geoffroy, and Lamarck on, 326, 327, 328
—— Buffon on the, 103;
difference between Buffon’s and Lamarck’s view of their action, 105
—— direct action of changed, Buffon on the, 145, 147, 160
—— Lamarck on, 105, 268, 270, 271, 275, 277, 278, 281, 291, 292, 294, 295, 298, 299, 300, &c.
Continuity in discontinuity, and vice versâ, 47
Contracts of animals, Dr. E. Darwin on the, 205
Contrivance, does organism show signs of this? 2
Convenient, not only sometimes, but always, more, 365
Corkscrew for corks, and lungs for respiration, Prof. Clifford on, 7. See also
