*

science of improvement has been applied, the rule is uniform, the law is universal, and is precisely the opposite of the proposition of Dr. Darwin. The tendency of nature is promptly and rapidly to retrogression to the original inferior form, to the lower organization, as soon as the human care and culture are withdrawn. Let the gardener permit his vegetables to seed themselves, as it is called, instead of selecting the earliest and largest ripened fruits for seed, and in a few years the degenerate and stunted product will be hardly fit for food. The plant has returned to its original state, and there the capacity of change is arrested; the form is permanent, until human intelligence again renews the process of improvement.

Leave a stock of Berkshires to nature and to "natural selection." Turn them into the woods to shift for themselves. All but a few worthless specimens will speedily perish. These may survive and propagate, until the original and inferior condition is reached. Look at the little shaggy ponies of the Western plains of Spanish America, the degraded product of the noble Spanish and Barbary horses introduced into that country, and left to "natural selection."

This essential proposition of Mr. Darwin is in point-blank contradiction of all the facts, as far as human knowledge goes. All change, all improvement, for any purpose outside of human care, is simply guess-work, is utterly unknown.

Not only is the general proposition thus disproved by the facts, but each minuter point and detail of the dictum is similarly disproved. It is not true that the higher organizations conquer and displace the lower in the struggle of nature. On the contrary, observation points to the reverse of this assertion as more nearly true. The lower forms of life seem to be far more persistent and enduring than the higher. Cold-blooded animals are known to be longer lived than the warm-blooded. The lower forms of life are incomparably more prolific than the higher. As you ascend in the scale, the number of offspring and the capacity of reproduction is diminished. Some of these lower forms will produce in a day more offspring than an equal number of the higher in a century. The higher the organization, the more exposed to disease, the more liable to destruction. The rule holds good as between different families, and equally as between members of the same family. It even extends to different constitutions, classes, and grades of

men. Feeble constitutions are singularly exempt from active disease. They live on, and are prolific, while the stout and hearty are swept away from around them. The lower grades of human society propagate without reserve, and tend constantly to a deeper degradation, and to the capacity of living on the minimum of subsistence. This well known fact disposes of many of the sophistries and assumptions of a Darwinian disciple in the July number for 1869, of the North British Review. This writer undertakes to prove the upward progress of society from the lowest savage state, by the present contrast between the lowest and the highest class in London, assuming that the latter started from the present level of the former. Fortunately the evidence is too strong that the present condition of that lowest class is the result of long continued degradation. Two centuries ago there were no such people in England as the present lowest class in London. The law is universal, that if men are removed from the moral restraints of society and religion, — of society quickened by religion, — they sink rapidly in character and condition. The history of large cities, and of the border lands of civilization, alike prove this rule. In cities the increase of wealth and refinement tends constantly to isolate the lower orders from their superiors in these particulars, until the lowest class forms a caste as distinct and independent as if they lived in a distant country. When this stage is reached the degradation becomes more rapid and intense, because the isolation is complete. Social restraint, religious restraint, cease to be operative. Men become animals merely, and give full scope to the animal propensities. The CASTE is completely isolated from that social order which is informed, quickened, and moved by religion, and it becomes little more than a mere herding of brute humanity. Propagation goes on with no moral limit whatever; and in spite of the filth and squalor, the starvation and disease, the population in this lowest stratum increases far more rapidly than in any of the higher grades. Years ago a distinguished London magistrate, o large experience in dealing with this class, testified before a parliamentary committee, as the result of his observation, that if a row of hogsheads were placed along the curbstones of the London streets, they would soon be occupied as dwellings by a yet lower stratum of human beings, who would propagate their likeness in these homes.

Now, then, which theory is more scientific,—most like to science,

-that which ascribes the wondrously complex phenomena of living forms to a sufficient Cause, analogous to another cause which we see and know to be in constant action producing analogous effects, or that which ascribes the same phenomena to a purely imaginary faculty, utterly unknown, the fanciful conjecture of an ingenious naturalist?

We have examined with care, we do not profess impartiality in such an issue, but we have examined with care, and with full allowance of every legitimate demand, the theory of Dr. Darwin. Instead of finding it science, or scientific, or reasonably plausible, we have found that all its postulates are not only assumptions unsupported by proof, but that they are directly contradicted by all the known facts in that sphere of nature to which the inquiry belongs. Surely, then, we cannot be reproached as the enemies of science when we reject this theory, and all its cognate systems, on purely scientific grounds, as well as on behalf of reason, religion, logic, and common sense.

ART. VI.- CLERICAL CELIBACY.

A SERIOUS misconception as to the character of the wishes and intentions of the advocates of clerical celibacy has arisen in the minds of some; though such misconception, if not willful, is assuredly inexplicable and inexcusable. It is charged that, whether intentionally or no, the advocacy of a celibate life for the Clergy has a decided tendency to depreciate the honorable estate of matrimony, and hence to revive that horrible doctrine of the Manicheans and Montanists which from the commencement of the fourth century, in spite of powerful opposition and rigorous persecution, exerted such a pernicious influence over the eastern section of the Church, and which, when driven from that stronghold, worked its way into the South of France, Germany, Italy, and even England, in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. It seems hardly comprehensible that men who are decried by some for asserting that marriage is a sacrament should actually be accused by others of inculcating by their personal example and writings one of the most detestable of the many heresies of the Persian Manes, who declared that marriage was always a mortal sin, the punishment of which would not be less in the future than that of adultery or incest. Such

teachings are in direct opposition to the purpose of creation, antagonistic to the implied approval of marriage expressed in the presence of our Lord at the marriage of Cana in Galilee, and contrary to the letter and spirit of apostolic injunction.

It is desirable, then, that some authoritative settlement of this question should be arrived at: Is a celibate Clergy desirable? if so, should their celibacy be compulsory or voluntary?

The whole spirit of modern Anglican Catholicism at once points. to the practice of the Primitive Church as an example, and the very best authority to which the Clergy could submit themselves.

The sentiments of the early Christians with regard to marriage are fully expressed in the causes for which matrimony was ordained, as recited in the Anglican Form of Solemnization of Matrimony, which

says:

"First, It was ordained for the procreation of children, to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of His holy

name."

Secondly, It was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication; that such persons as had not the gift of continency might marry and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ's body."

66

Thirdly, It was ordained for the mutual society, help, and comfort that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity."

Continence is here, as in all instances, spoken of as a gift, as a virtue not common to all,—and consequently to be looked upon as a higher grade of Christian life than the marriage state; and in this light it was most certainly regarded by the Primitive Church. This view is in perfect harmony with the teachings of our Lord. The same authoritative voice which enjoined "what, therefore, God hath joined together, let no man put asunder" (Matt. xix. 6), in speaking of celibacy, "for the kingdom of heaven's sake," said: "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" (Mat. xix. 12). And in answer to the inquiry of His disciples, "Behold, we have forsaken all and followed Thee: what shall we have therefore?" our Lord replied: "Every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit everlasting life" (Matt. xix. 27, 29). But the self-sacrifice is to be made for His name's sake; that is, voluntarily, and being a gift from Him, not to be assumed at the

bidding even of the Church, who cannot give what He alone can give.

The whole tenor of the recommendations of St. Paul to the Corinthians on the subject of marriage (he, however, distinctly disclaims the reception of any "commandment" in the matter, but speaks by "permission ") is in conformity with the words of our Lord. Though advising them that "it is good for a man not to touch a woman" (1 Cor. vii. 1), he adds, "Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband" (1 Cor. vii. 2). The Apostle, while evincing a strong preference for the purity of the unmarried life, leaves them to use their own discretion in individual cases. "But every man," he says, "hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn" (1 Cor. vii. 7, 8, 9). And again he says: "Now concerning virgins" (the term is applied to both sexes in Scripture and by the Fathers) "I have no commandment of the Lord; yet I give my judgment as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress " (the distress of the present life); "I say it is good for a man so to be" (1 Cor vii. 25, 26). Also in his Epistle to the Galatians, in speaking of Christian duties and privileges, he says: "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections" (passions) "and lusts" (Gal. v. 24).

that

St. John evidently alludes to that higher and distinctive reward intimated by our Lord for those who lead a life of virginity. Speaking of them, he says: "These are they which were not defiled by women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the first fruits unto God and to the Lamb" (Rev. xiv. 4). St. Cyprian, in his treatise on the Dress of Virgins, lays great stress on this special reward of virginity, which he describes as a

Straight and narrow way which leads to life; a rough and steep track which reaches to glory. The Lord does not enforce this," he adds, “but He exhorts it, not imposing a yoke of necessity, in that the choice remains free. Still, when He tells us that with His Father are many mansions, He guides us to seek a home in the best. That best home you are seeking; and, by cutting off the desires of the flesh, you will obtain a recompense higher grace in heavenly places."

of