385 
that that was a designed coincidence. I felt that, as this was the first time I 
had come among you, it would 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 fault 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 refer 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 Church ; 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 inquiry might lead us too far back out of 
the original line of argument, because we can never forget that there is a 
