125
the commentator warns us not to misunderstand this
rhetorical exaggeration of allegorical teaching. “ The
Apostle,” says Dean Stanley, “could scarcely have meant
to use the expression ‘ that God does not care for oxen ’
as absolutely true, in the face of such passages as Psalms
xxxvi. 6, cxlvii. 9.”* In the same way, it is quite possible
that a philosopher might contend that animals were made
for the use of man without denying that their instincts
were of primary use to themselves. Take, for example,
the instance of William Somerville, the author of the
poem called The Chase. No one could assert more em
phatically than he does that the animals were made for
the use of man. Witness the following passage:—
“ The soul
Of man alone, that particle divine,
Escapes the wreck of worlds, when all things fail.
Hence great the distance ’twixt the beasts that perish
And God’s bright image, man’s immortal race.
The brute creation are his property
Subservient to his will, and for him made.
As hurtful, these he kills ; as useful those
Preserves, their sole and arbitrary King.”
—(Book iv., lines 4-12.)
And yet he instances an instinct which is certainly of
primary use to the animal. Speaking of a pack of
hounds, he says :—
“ Others apart by native instinct led
Knowing instructor ! ’mong the ranker grass
Cull each salubrious plant, with bitter juice
Concoctive stored, and potent to allay
Each vicious ferment. Thus the hand divine
Of Providence, beneficent and kind
To all his creatures, for the brutes prescribes
A ready remedy and is himself
Their great physician.”
—(jBook i., lines 208-216.)
Stanley's Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians, vol. i., p. 172.