154 
great reputation, “ When you go into the law of gravitation, or of light, 
the lines in the spectrum, &c., do you endeavour to determine whether the 
principle which is at the root of it all works upon its own responsibility ? ” 
His answer was, “We have nothing to do with that; we do not go into 
that at all.” Well, that is just what I say. Take an abstract law as such, 
and what is it ? Put this question to the highest authority you like — to La 
Place, or any great man of science — and they will acknowledge at once that 
Nature must be pervaded by a Divine intelligence which superintends and 
directs all these things, that they are not ruled and controlled by any mere 
abstract law which has simply been impressed on creation. I am certain 
that were we to compare notes with men in the highest realms of science, 
there are points upon which, — if really, and truly, and rightly understood,- — 
they would not ignore the simple facts and truths recorded in the volume 
of Bible history. This, at least, is my firm conviction. 
Bishop M‘Dougall — I only wish to say a word or two. I was brought 
up among scientific men, and thrown a great deal into the society of men of 
unbelief, and afterwards, when I went abroad, it struck me that I found 
existing among the heathen the very same kind of unbelief that we are now 
discussing, as to the question of prayer. If you go to the heathen, you find 
him worshipping a good power and an evil power. He worships the one for 
benefits, but he is led to be more particular in his worship of the Devil 
because he fears him most. If you say to him “ Do you not believe in the 
one great Ruler who controls all things ? ” he will say “ Yes ; I believe in 
Him, and that He made all things ; but now He sleeps.” It seems to me 
that some scientific men, if questioned in the same way, would say some- 
thing tantamount to “ Yes, we believe in the Creator of all things ; but it is 
of no use to pray to Him, because He sleeps.” They have yet to learn to 
acknowledge that the great God never sleeps, but that His eye is over all 
things, and that He knows every thought and mystery of our nature. 
Rev. C. A. Row. — I feel somewhat painfully placed with respect to this 
paper. I think it does not grapple with the real difficulty with respect to 
prayer either from the atheistic or the theistic side ; or with the question 
how it is that prayer can be answered consistently with the maintenance of 
the laws of the universe. Even taking it from the theistic side, I thought 
that there the difficulty was, not that God cannot answer prayer, but as to 
whether He will interfere with the laws of the universe so as to make a direct 
answer to prayer. The Book of Psalms has been referred to. I do not 
suppose that Professor Tyndall excepts against the Book of Psalms ; but 
what he does take exception to is the statement that the prayers which 
involve changes in the physical laws of Nature are answered. He would 
say that persons pray for things which are very extravagant. It is an 
undoubted fact that extravagant things are prayed for ; but I cannot see in 
what sense you can allege it against Professor Tyndall that he ignores the 
fact of these prayers having been offered. What he denies is the fact that 
the prayers so offered have been answered. There is no doubt that Professor 
Tyndall has travelled beyond the limits of his facts as a simple student of 
