511 
which I apprehend is the only working principle on which any science what- 
ever can he tested, we have as much right to apply that principle to our own 
theology and to matters of faith, as men of science have to apply it to the 
elements with which they deal. I think that passage of Mr. Row’s, where he 
intimates that you can only deny miracles by going off the basis of inductive 
science, is very true and penetrating. That is what Strauss and Renan do ; 
and it underlies all the a priori criticism of a particular school. When you 
depart from the basis of induction, which was Christ’s own method, you end 
in pantheism, and nothing but a foregone conclusion as to pantheism can 
justify any one in denying the probability of a miracle. Resting on that, I 
think we may come, as Mr. Row has said, to such a theory of inspiration as 
all parties are bound to accept. Let us take the phenomena and the facts ; 
let us analyze them, and find what inspiration is. It will be a difficult pro- 
cess, but it is the only one by which we can ascertain the truth as to our 
theology. 
Mr. Redpie. — It is now so late that I feel I should be acting very unwisely 
were I to occupy much of your time ; I must therefore pass over much 
minute criticism which I had intended to give Mr. Row the advantage of, and 
will limit myself to a few observations on important points. And first, as 
to the general antagonism which Mr. Row has noticed at some length in 
this paper as between the theologians and the scientific men, — I am not aware 
that theologians have taken exception to science as science. I have heard 
them refuse to admit certain so-called sciences to be true science ; and I am 
sorry to say I have heard some theologians refuse to admit reason in matters 
of theology ; but they are a small and diminishing, if not already extinct, 
party, and we may leave them out of consideration. The warfare which 
Mr. Row speaks of is not with those theologians who deny reason, but rather 
with those who are supposed to deny science ; and I must say that as regards 
that war I do not want peace. But I do not think you can compare it to a 
material battle between nations. This is a matter that every man must 
think out in his own mind, and if men’s minds are antagonistic, the differing 
parties must fight it out : and there can be only but one basis of peace, and 
that is truth. Until they arrive at that, there will be no peace ; and there 
should not be. To get rid of this notion (which I am sorry to say Mr. Row 
has put forward more than once), that science as science is objected to by 
those who uphold revelation, I will bring Mr. Row to a definite test. He 
has referred to astronomy ; but I will not go into that to-night, because I am 
going to read a paper on the subject in the course of the present session; and 
I want to bespeak the most extreme and bitter antagonism to what I shall 
then say, if I am wrong. But I will now pass on to geology, which in the 
present day has been more frequently placed at issue with theology than 
anything else, and Mr. Row has laid especial stress upon it. We shall see 
whether he will be able to answer this evening what I have now to say, and 
if not, whether he will do so at some other time. It will be placed on record 
in our Journal of Transactions , and if he does not answer it, all he has said 
on that subject must go for worse than nothing. Now I venture to say that 
YOL. III. 2 N 
