93 
qualities of man, as the author has well observed, we may justly do this 
because we are made in the image of God, and not because we make a 
God in the image of man. I press this point, inasmuch as I regard all that 
is said by our opponents upon the subject as simply absurd ; for, if we 
cease to think in anthropomorphic conceptions, we must cease to think at 
all, inasmuch as we can have nothing but anthropomorphic conceptions 
wherewith to think. 
Mr. D. Howard, V.P.I.C. — I regard this as a most interesting paper upon 
a most interesting subject. Prebendary Row has very ably put forward 
an immensely important argument in favour of design , by combating the 
idea that, if you can quarrel with Paley’s mode of dealing with evidence, 
you have done away with evidence altogether, — that if you quarrel with the 
enunciation of Butler’s Analogy , you have got rid of the Analogy itself. 
The truth is, that the argument lies before our eyes, and we cannot get over 
it except by shutting our eyes to it. This paper, which deals only with one 
little corner of the subject, but which deals most distinctly and ably with 
what it does grasp, not only gives instances of design against which it is im- 
possible to close our eyes, but points to a sphere in which there are countless 
others. With regard to any fact on which it is possible to get cumulative 
evidence, it is undoubtedly easy to arrive at absolute certainty. I remember 
soon after the siege of Strasburg, standing on the cathedral-tower with the old 
custodian of the edifice, and I necessarily noticed that a few bombshells had 
burst on the building. The custodian told me that the Germau artillery fired 
at the cathedral night and day. Just below, however, was the citadel, which 
they had really fired at night and day, and they could hardly help a chance 
shot or two falling on the old ecclesiastical structure ; but the citadel, which 
is not nearly so conspicuous a building as the cathedral, was utterly anni- 
hilated. Of course, one could not have supposed that chance had guided 
the great mass of the bombs into the citadel, and that the same chance had 
preserved the cathedral. In the same way, we may regard the manifold 
evidences we see converging to a given point as evident proofs of design. 
When one looks at the materialistic fallacies of the present day, one finds 
that design, although rejected in specious language, comes back again ; that 
after all, what are termed the blind forces of nature have design attributed 
to them ; and that you are speaking in the most anthropomorphic form when 
you refuse to give the honour to God, and give it to the forces of nature. In 
point of fact the forces of nature become those of a personal God by the very 
language applied to them. If people find that the arguments of our oppo- 
nents against design satisfy their intellect, they must be wonderfully con- 
stituted. Reasoning from analogy, we must say from the evidence of some- 
thing in nature which we cannot speak of without attributing intelligent 
personality to the Author of it, is so strong, that it is absolutely certain that 
in denying an intelligent Being to govern it, they are making a blunder. 
It is truly said, by this paper, that the precise way of creation is not to the 
point. That is a question upon which there may be wide diversities of 
opinion ; but, as I have just said, that is not the real point at issue. If we 
