If he chose to do it, could He not do it

Such at least is the conclusion of one who, studying certain familiesof plants, which indulge in the most fantastic vaneties of shape and size.and yet through all their vagaries retain- as do the Palms, the Orchids,the Euphorbiaceae-one organ, or form of organs, peculiar and highlyspecialized, yet constant throughout the whole of each family, has beendriven to the belief that each of these three families, at least, hassported off from one common ancestor- one archetypal Palm, onearchetypal Orchid, one archery pal Euphorbia, simple, it may be, in itself,but endowed with infinite possibilities of new and complex beauty, to bedeveloped, not in it, but in its descendants.

He has asked himselfsitting alone amid the boundless wealth of tropic forests, whether eventhen and there the great God might not be creating round him, slowly butsurely, new forms of beauty? If he chose to do it, could He not do it?That man found himself none the worse Christian for the thought Hehas said-and must be allowed to say again, for he sees no reason to alterhis words.n speaking of the wonderful variety of forms in theEuphorbiaceae, from the weedy English Euphorbias, the DogsMercuries, and the Box, to the prickly-stemmed Scarlet Euphorbia ofMadagascar, the succulent Cactus-like Euphorbias of the Canaries andelsewhere: the Gale-like Phyllanthus: the many- formed Crotons: theHemp-luke Manioc, Physic-nuts, Castor-oils, the scarlet Poinsettia, thelittle pink and yellow Dalechampia, the poisonous Manchineel, and thegigantic Hura, or sandbox tree, of the West Indies, -all so different inshape and size, yet all alike in their most peculiar and complexfructification, and in their acrid milky juice, " What if all these forms arethe descendants of one original form? Would that be one whit the morewonderful than the theory that they were, each and all, with the minute,and often imaginary, shades of difference between certain cognatespecies among them, created separately and at once? But if it be sowhich I cannot allow. what would the theologian have to say, save thatGod's works are even more wonderful than he always believed them tobe? As for the theory being impossible. that is to be decided by menof science, on strict experimental grounds. As for us theologians, whoare we, that we should limit,priori, the power of God? Is any thingtoo hard for the Lord? asked the prophet of old; and we have a right toask it as long as the world shall last. If it be said that natural selection,or, as Mr. Herbert Spencer better defines it, the 'survival of the fittest, istoo simple a cause to produce such fantastic vaniety-that, again, is aquestion to be settled exclusively by men of science, on their owngrounds. We, meanwhile, always knew that God works by very simple,or seemingly simple, means; that the universe, as far as we could discemit, was one organization of the most simple means. It was wonderfulor should have been- in our eyes, that a shower of rain should make thegrass grow, and that the grass should become flesh, and the flesh foodfor the thinking brain of man. It was- or ought to have been.morewonderful yet to us that a child should resemble its parents, or even abutterfly resemble, if not always, still usually, its parents likewiseOught God to appear less or more august in our eyes if we discover thatthe means are even simpler than we supposed? We held HimAlmighty and All-wise. Are we to reverence Him less or more if wefind Him to be so much mightier, so much wiser, than we dreamed, thatHe can not only make all things, but- the very perfection of creativepowerMAKE ALL THINGS MAKE THEMSELVES? We believedthat His care was over all His works; that His providence workedperpetually over the universe. We were taught- some of us at least-byHoly Scripture, that without Him not a sparrow fell to the ground, andthat the very hairs of our head were all numbered. that the whole historof the universe was made up, in fact, of an infinite network of specialprovidences. If, then, that should be true which a great naturalist writesIt may be metaphorically said that natural selection is daily and hourlyscrutinizing throughout the world. every variation, even the slightest:rejecting that which is bad, preserving and adding up all that is good;silently and insensibly working, whenever and wherever opportunityoffers, at the improvement of each organic being, in relation to itsorganic and inorganic conditions of life,-if this, I say, were provedbe true, ought God s care and God's providence to seem less or moremagnificent in our eyes? Of old it was said by Him without whomnothing is made- My Father worketh hitherto. and i work Shall wequarrel with physical science, if she gives us evidence that those wordsare true?

And-understand it well-the grand passage I have just quoted neednot be accused of substituting natural selection for god In any casnatural selection would be only the means or law by which God worksas He does by other natural laws. We do not substitute gravitation forGod, when we say that the planets are sustained in their orbits by the lawof gravitation. The theory about natural selection may be untrue, ormperfect, as may the modem theories of the evolution and progress"oforganic forms: let the man of science decide that But if true thetheories seem to me perfectly to agree with, and may be perfectlyexplained by, the simple old belief which the Bible sets before us, of aLIVING GOD: not a mere past will, such as the Koran sets forticreating once and for all, and then leaving the universe, to use Goethessimile, to spin round his finger, nor again, an"all-pervading spirit,words which are mere contradictory jargon, concealing, from those whoutter them blank Materialism: but One who works in all things whichhave obeyed Him to will and to do of His good pleasure, keeping Hisabysmal and self-perfect purpose, yet altering the methods by which thatpurpose is attained, from aeon to aeon, ay, from moment to moment, forever various. vet for ever the same. This great and vet most blessedparadox of the Changeless God, who yet can say It repenteth me,andBehold I work a new thing on the earth is revealed no less by naturethan by Scripture, the changeableness, not of caprice or imperfection,but of an infinite maker and Poretes. drawing ever fresh forms out ofthe inexhaustible treasury of His primaeval Mind: and yet neverthrowing away a conception to which He has once given actual birth mtime and space, (but to compare reverently small things and grealovingly repeating it re-applying it producing the same effects byendlessly difterent methods or so delicately modifing the method thatas by the tum of a hair, it shall produce endlessly diverse effects: lookingback as it were ever and anon over the great work of all the ages toretouch it and fill up each chasm in the scheme. which for some goodpurpose had been left open m earlier worlds, or leaving some open (thforms. for instance necessar to connect the bimana and thequadrumana) to be filled up perhaps hereafter when the worid needsthem, the handiwork, im short of a living and loving Mind, perfect mHIs owstooping to work im time and space, and thereRejoicingwork of His own hands. and in His etemalSabbaths ceasing im rest ineffable, that He may look on that which Hehath made. and behold it is verv good