90 SIR G. GABRIEL STOKES, BART., F.R.S., ON 



into any apparent conflict between what was supposed l^y some 

 to be the legitimate conclusions of Science, and what was 

 believed by others to be revealed. The two questions, there- 

 fore, of what is established by Science and what has been 

 revealed to man come more or less into the functions of this 

 Institute; but it is not a Society intended primarily for the 

 production of original discoveries in Science — although an 

 account of such, if it were offered, would not for that 

 reason be rejected, still less is it intended to be a Society 

 for the discussion of purely theological questions. Those 

 who believe that a revelation has been made from God to 

 man, and who believe also that the system of Nature and 

 the laws which govern it are His work, must accept as an 

 axiom that there can be no real antagonism between the 

 two ; that accordingly any apparent antagonism must be due 

 to a mistake, either on the one side or on the other. It is 

 with a view of investigating, as far as may be, the origin of 

 such mistakes, and accordingly remo^ang that appearance — 

 for it can only be an appearance — of antagonism between 

 the two, that this Institute was maiidy founded. In order 

 that it should be able to fulfil these offices, it is essential that 

 those who endeavour to remove the apparent discrepancies 

 to which I have alluded should come to the investigation 

 with open mind, free from prejudice, desiring only to learn 

 the truth according as it may appear on qh impartial review 

 of the whole of the evidence. Those who approach the 

 investigation rather from the side of Science must not 

 assume that everything in Nature is capable of explanation 

 by purely scientific methods ; nor must those who come to 

 the investigation rather from the theological side consider 

 that they are infallible in the interpretation which they are dis- 

 posed to place upon what they believe to be revealed. Nor, 

 again must these latter forget that as regards the real evidence 

 bearing upon the question obtainable from the study of 

 science they themselves may not always be the best judges, 

 because as a rule perhaps they would not have made a very 

 special study of the scientific questions which they imagine 

 to come into conflict with what, on entirely dift'erent grounds, 

 they believe to be the truth. There must be mutual tolera- 

 tion between those who approach the subject from the 

 scientific, and those who approach it rather from the theo- 

 logical side, each being ready to modify, if sufficient reason 

 be shewn, his preconceived opinions in the simple pursuit of 

 truth. 



