385 



that that was a designed coincidence. I felt that, as this was the first time 1 

 had come among you, it wonld be rather presuming on my part if I were to 

 take up too great a portion of your time. Moreover, there is some degree of 

 satisfaction in knowing that one foult alleged against the paper was that it was 

 too short. I may also say, at this point, that I have extended my analogy 

 considerably further than has appeared in the paper ; and if I had had time, 

 I would have pointed out that there is an analogy between the four ages of 

 nature, which I have classified as the reigns of fishes, reptiles, mammals, and 

 man, and the successive dispensations, as mentioned in the Bible. There you 

 will see the Patriarchal dispensation, the Levitical, the Prophetical, and the 

 dispensation of the New Testament. I look on old Judaism, with its types 

 and symbols, as containing so many petrifactions, as it were, which it is most 

 useful for us to tefer to, and which help many a time to throw light on 

 what we see in the New Testament." But I did not think it necessary forme, 

 in such a paper as I have read, to go into these details. With reference to 

 what has been said about the Germanic, the Greek, and the Celtic forms of 

 Christianity, I wish to make one observation by way of caution, and it is 

 this : The law of variety has its limits, and this is most beautifully shown in 

 the case of orchids, to which reference is made in the paper. Do your best, 

 and you cannot propagate them beyond a certain limit, and this is one of the 

 strongest and most fatal facts that can be used in opposition to the Darwinian 

 theory. And so it is with regard to the various forms of Christianity. I 

 maintain that by analogy, every form of Christianity retaining the simple 

 truths of the Bible is a form of Christianity which is in itself pure, and good, 

 and excellent ; but this observation is to be limited in proportion as there is 

 introduced upon, those Bible truths, anything which verges upon mere 

 tradition. I might have alluded to the Greek ChurcTi ; but I did not like to 

 enter into these things in my paper, because I did not know but that, 

 although there might be unity here in general, there might be great variety 

 in details. (Laughter.) But I cannot help saying, however much I may 

 differ from some of my friends on this point, that I am somewhat catholic and 

 liberal in my views, which I may explain by the expression of St. Paul, that 

 there are differences of denominations, but the same Lord. (Hear, hear.) 

 Every one of us, as a basis of unity, may acknowledge the same Lord, but there 

 may be many differences as to other matters. With regard to what Mr. 

 Row has said, about the danger of assuming that many of the peculiar struc- 

 tures of the animal creation have resulted, not from the act of the Divine 

 being, but from the fall of man ; I think that there is no creature which 

 has been placed upon this earth that does not show, in some way or other, the 

 wisdom of the Great Designer ; but how far we are to trace back the various 

 evils to be noticed in connection with God's creatures, to their Almighty 

 Maker, is quite another question. (Hear, hear.) This point arises in connection 

 with the venom of the serpent, the trickery of the fox, and many other well- 

 known instances ; but this sort of inquir}^ might lead us too far back out of 

 the original line of argument, because we can never forget that there is a 



