335 
had from hearing Bishop Cotterill read it ; but I am very glad to 
have the opportunity of expressing my general appreciation and admiration of 
the whole paper. I do not see the difficulty that Dr. Irons has seen in the 
particular passage he has quoted. I imagine that the Bishop’s words are in 
perfect consistency with what Revelation itself tells us, that “ whatsoever the 
Lord pleased, that did He in Heaven and earth, and in the sea, and in all deep 
places.” If I might venture to add one other observation, I would say that 
I hope no one who has hitherto applied his mind merely to the second 
branch of the subject to which Bishop Cotterill has alluded, will be at 
all discouraged from the endeavour to penetrate those higher and nobler 
realms which lie beyond. On the contrary, I am persuaded that the man of 
faith has an enormous advantage in dealing with questions of science, With 
regard to the man of science, much as we are indebted to him for what he 
has done for us (and for myself, I must say I feel under great obligations 
to every one who truthfully and honestly applies his mind to the investigation 
of great scientific truths), I cannot but feel that without exploring those 
higher realms he lacks something in moral force. It would be an enormous 
advantage to him, and would give a higher elevation to all his thoughts, if he 
were to apply his energies and powers to the investigation of these subjects, 
with which he ought to be more familiar. I am inclined to think that 
there may be something in the thought that it is possible, that by a 
succession of inductions we may at last, by scientific methods, reach a point 
at which we shall see that the whole of the universe around us is the product 
of one universal Intelligence pervading all things. I thank the Bishop very 
heartily for his masterly and suggestive paper. 
Rev. D. Greig. — I should be obliged if you will allow me to express my 
great appreciation of the paper which we have had the good fortune to hear 
read this evening. I am quite sure that all those who have been occupied, 
as I myself have to some extent been, in studying these questions, will feel, 
as they go through this paper, that the author has really got to the bottom of 
the subject. It is the paper of a man who has really worked out the question 
he has set himself to consider. You see this in every sentence, and there are 
many indications of that which probably to a person unacquainted with the 
subject would not be very evident, but which are clear enough to those who 
have studied the question. Therefore I look upon the paper as one of 
very great value. There can be no doubt that the subject is the great 
subject of the day. It distinguishes the respective spheres of science and 
theology. Now this is rather too hard a question to discuss in an ex- 
temporary manner, but I must say that the more one studies the point, 
the more one sees that there are really two spheres. There is really one 
half of nature which it is impossible for science to touch. Science deals 
with only one side of nature, so to speak. The points of distinction have 
not yet been exactly defined, but still they are very palpable, and what 
gratifies me especially in this paper is that it takes up and brings out in 
a very clear and telling way one effect of the distinction which probably 
