individuals merely, but whole varieties and races; the total organized
life on this planet; and, it may be, the total organization of the
universe, have been evolved just as our bodies are, by natural laws
acting through circumstance. This may be true, or may be false. But all
its truth can do to the natural Theologian will be to make him believe
that the Creator bears the same relation to the whole universe, as that
Creator undeniably bears to every individual human body.

I entreat you to weigh these words, which have not been written in haste;
and I entreat you also, if you wish to see how little the new theory,
that species may have been gradually created by variation, natural
selection, and so forth, interferes with the old theory of design,
contrivance, and adaptation, nay, with the fullest admission of
benevolent final causes--I entreat you, I say, to study Darwin's
"Fertilization of Orchids"--a book which, whether his main theory be true
or not, will still remain a most valuable addition to natural Theology.

For suppose that all the species of Orchids, and not only they, but their
congeners--the Gingers, the Arrowroots, the Bananas--are all the
descendants of one original form, which was most probably nearly allied
to the Snowdrop and the Iris. What then? Would that be one whit more
wonderful, more unworthy of the wisdom and power of God, than if they
were, as most believe, created each and all at once, with their minute
and often imaginary shades of difference? What would the natural
Theologian have to say, were the first theory true, save that God's works
are even more wonderful that he always believed them to be? As for the
theory being impossible: we must leave the discussion of that to physical
students. It is not for us clergymen to limit the power of God. "Is
anything too hard for the Lord?" asked the prophet of old; and we have a
right to ask it as long as time shall last. If it be said that natural