for the communication of the decisive and pungent 

 reply. The one is certain to call forth the other, 

 and if the two are present side by side in the same 

 series, so much the better is it for the truth and so 

 much the worse for the error. The teacher before 

 his class, the lecturer in the presence of his audience, 

 has the argument usually to himself ; he allows few 

 questionings and admits no reply. An erroneous 

 theory may entrench itself within a folio against 

 arguments which would annihilate its positions if 

 these were condensed in a tract. 



This consideration should dispel all the alarm 

 that is felt by the defenders of religion in view of 

 the general diffusion of popular scientific treatises. 

 The brief statement of a false or groundless scien- 

 tific theory, even by its defender, is often its most 

 effectual refutation. A magnificently imposing 

 argument often shrinks into insignificance when its 

 advocate is forced to state its substance in a com- 

 pact and close-jointed outline. The articulations 

 are seen to be defective, the joints do not fit one 

 another, the coherence is conspicuously wanting. 

 Let then error do its utmost in the field of science. 

 Its deficient data and its illogical processes are cer- 

 tain to be exposed, sometimes even by its own advo- 

 cates. If this does not happen the defender of that 

 scientific truth which seems to be essential to the 

 teachings and faiths of religion, must scrutinize its 

 reasonings by the rules and methods of scientific 

 inquiry. If science seems to be hostile to religion, 

 this very seeming should arouse the defender of 

 Theism and Christianity to examine into the grounds 

 both by the light and methods which are appropriate 



