158 
off as possible,’ at the remote end of an ‘ illimitable avenue ’ of duly condi- 
tioned Universes. Unto Him the Son, as conditioned, seems to have no 
access.” 
I do not gather this from the book . It says He came out from the bosom of 
the Father ; and the writers quote the passage, “ Lo, I come ; in the volume 
of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, 0 my God.” Then 
Ur. Irons says : — 
“ But the Son, the real Creator, was always God ‘ conditioned ’ as an 
‘ Energy ’ forming the worlds. The Spirit is the ‘ Life-giving ’ conditioned 
Being, Who co-operates with the Creator of matter, or Son ; - unless, possibly, 
‘ matter ’ be eternal, and only ‘ energy ’ were created. 
“Few Christians — believers that the Incarnation began at the Nativity — 
will accept this account of their faith, if nakedly put before them.” 
But the authors are not referring to the Incarnation at all in this place, but to 
the theological distinction between the Logos Endiathetos and the Logos 
I rophorikos a distinction insisted on by Dr. Newman, when he says, 
Endiathetos stands for the word as hid from everlasting in the bosom of the 
lather, while the Prophorikos is the Son sent forth into the world in apparent 
separation from God. ’ It seems to me that the authors are in strict har- 
mony with Newman’s book on the Arians and with Mill’s book on the 
Apostles’ Creed, and that the objections vanish when the book is read in 
connection with the point of view taken by the authors themselves, after 
making allowance for certain points here and there. 
Dr. Irons— I will only detain you a very short time, as I am not 
physically able to say much to-night. Almost every speech that has been 
made has contained valuable matter, and I must thank all the speakers, 
certainly not excepting the last. I think, however, that Mr. MacColl 
surprised me the most. He said I had made a statement that did not 
correspond with the book. 
Mr. MacColl. — I said so of Dr. Irons’ inferences, not of his statement. 
Dr. Irons.— Mr. MacColl quoted the statement as a quotation from the 
book that “ Evil is woven into the essential texture of the garments with 
which the Eternal God, our Father, has clothed Himself.” That passage 
seems to have appeared in inverted commas by some unobserved accident, 
and how it so came into the paper I do not know. But what I am most 
concerned in is, whether it is a true representation of the authors’ meaning i 
whether they did not affirm that evil is not an accident, but that it is woven 
into the essential “ texture of the garment.” 
Mr. MacColl. There must be some mistake in my copy, because the 
passage is here given in inverted commas. 
Dr. Irons. It is an accident which has occurred in this rough copy of 
the paper : a mere printer’s accident which had escaped me. Evidently 
those quotation marks must come out ; but the question is, whether the 
statement itself is a fair representation of the book ? The point is, whether 
