known or so much as imagined to have any existence in his days, but which now are discovered to serve the wisest and most exquisite ends imaginable?" *

Bacon's famous maxim, that "a little philosophy inclineth men's minds to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds back to religion," is now being reversed. The early glimpses of the marvels of nature afforded by modern science undoubtedly were favourable to natural theology in the first instance. Knowledge revealed so many wonders which had not been suspected by ignorance, that a general increase of awe and reverence for the Creator was the natural, though not very logical, consequence. But a deeper philosophy, or, rather, biology, has rudely disturbed the satisfaction with which "the wisest and most exquisite ends" were once regarded. It is now known that for one case of successful adaptation of means to ends in the animal world, there are hundreds of failures. If organs which serve an obvious end justify the assumption of an intelligent designer, what are we

to say of organs which serve no end at all, but are quite useless and meaningless? Such are the rudimentary organs in plants and animals, the design of which seems only to point to an unintelligent designer. "Some of the cases of rudimentary organs

* Page 103.

are extremely curious-the presence of teeth in foetal whales which, when grown up, have not a tooth in their heads, and the presence of teeth which never cut through the gums in the upper jaws of our unborn calves.... Nothing can be plainer than that wings are formed for flight; yet in how many insects do we see wings so reduced in size as to be utterly incapable of flight, and not rarely lying under wingcases, firmly soldered together."* Again, "Eyes which do not see, form the most striking example of rudimentary organs. These are found in very many animals which live in the dark, as in caves or underground. These eyes often exist in a welldeveloped condition, but they are covered by membrane, so that no ray of light can enter and they can never see. Such eyes, without the function of sight, are found in several species of moles and mice which live underground, in serpents and lizards, in amphibious animals (Proteus, Cæcilia), and in fishes; also in numerous invertebrate animals which pass their lives in the dark, as do many beetles, crabs, snails, worms," etc. Another strange instance is, "the rudiment of a tail which man possesses in his 3-5 tail vertebræ, and which, in the human embryo, stands out prominently during the first two months

* "Origin of Species," p. 450.

† Haeckel, "History of Creation," vol. i. p. 13.

of its development. It afterwards becomes completely hidden. The rudimentary little tail of man is an irrefutable proof of the fact that he is descended from tailed ancestors. In woman the tail is generally by one vertebra longer than in man. There still exist rudimentary muscles in the human tail which formerly moved it." *

That facts of this nature, which have only been a short time before the world, should fail to convince theologians brought up in a completely different order of ideas, is in no wise surprising. The due weight of facts will no more be allowed than the due weight of arguments, by minds which habit and education, and, perhaps, even a sense of duty, have combined to bias against them. But the effect on the younger and succeeding generations is very great, and is already perceptible. When theology was attacked in front with metaphysical arguments, such as were used by the old deists, it was able to make a very stout and plausible resistance. But now its position, in military phrase, has been turned; the heights around it and behind are occupied by an artillery which render further defence impossible. Take the instance of the origin of man. The whole scheme of Christian theology is meaningless except on the assumption of the fall of man from a primiHaeckel, "History of Creation," vol. i. p. 290.

tive state of innocence and virtue. Unless theologians are prepared to throw over St. Paul, they must hold that "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." Perhaps no one doctrine ever believed by man has had a more terrible history than that of "original or birth-sin," which, as the Ninth Article says, is "the fault and corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is ingendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation." But if ever a thesis was demonstrated, it is that man has not fallen, but risen, and that from the lowest level of animal existence. No court of justice ever witnessed a more complete discomfiture of an unfounded claim to a noble title and estate, than the defeat of this theological claim for man, that he was made in the image of God, placed in Paradise in a state of purity, from which he fell through disobedience. The result is serious. The New Testament endorses the fall in the most emphatic way; the Incarnation itself had no other object than that of neutralizing its effects. Yet it is proved to be a mere fiction of a primitive cosmogony.

The general rejection of symptom of the decay of belief.

miracles is another The once active con

troversy as to the possibility of miracles has become nearly extinct, because one of the parties to it has been growing steadily in numbers and authority, while the other party has declined. The refuters of Hume address constantly decreasing audiences, and the belief in miracles will shortly (like the belief in witchcraft in the seventeenth century) die a natural death among the educated classes. The notion that the testimony of men, however worthy and sincere, can suffice to establish a miraculous event, is no longer felt to be serious. The testimony of credible witnesses is valueless, unless they be competent witnesses as well-competent to observe with patience, accuracy, and coolness, the alleged facts. Were such observers present at the working of the miracles in Palestine which Paley patronizes? The argument against miracles has gained immensely in force since Hume's day through the growth of the historic method, and the larger conceptions of human evolution which have led to the incipient science of sociology. Hume's principle was tersely and fairly enough stated by Paley thus:-"That it is contrary to experience that miracles should be true, but not contrary to experience that testimony should be false;" a true statement, but not beyond the reach