s subversive in his treatment of history than the French critics whom
we have quoted. Although in apologetics the criterion for the acceptance
of dogmas must, he thinks, be a moral and practical one, he sometimes
speaks as if the 'prayer-value' of an ostensibly historical proposition
carried with it the necessity of its truth as matter of fact.

'Between the inward and the outward, the world of reality
and the world of appearances, the relation is not merely one
of symbolic correspondence. The distinction that is demanded
by the dualism of our mind implies and presupposes a causal
and dynamic unity of the two. We should look upon the
outward world as being an effectual symbol of the inward, in
consequence of its natural and causal connection
therewith.'[79]

But Mr. Tyrrell does not seem to mean all that these sentences might
imply. He speaks repeatedly, in the 'Lex Orandi,' of the 'will-world' as
the only real world.

'The will (he says) cannot make that true which in itself is
not true. But it can make that a fact relatively to our mind
and action which is not a fact relative to our
understanding.... It rests with each of us by an act of will
to create the sort of world to which we shall accommodate
our thought and action. ....It does not follow that harmony
of faith with the truths of reason and facts of experience
is the best or essential condition of its credibility....
Abstractions (he refers to the world as known to science)
are simple only because they are barren forms created by the
mind itself. Faith and doubt have a common element in the
deep sense of the insufficiency of the human mind to grasp
ultimate truths.... The world given to our outward senses is
shadowy and dreamy, except so far as we ascribe to it some
of the characteristics of will and spirit.... The world of
appearance is simply subordinate to the real world of our
will and affections.'

Because the 'abstract' sciences cannot and do not attempt to reach
ultimate truth, it is assumed that they are altogether 'barren forms,'
This is the error of much Oriental mysticism, which denies all value to
what it regards as the lower categories. In his later writings Mr.
Tyrrell objects to being classed with the American and English
pragmatists--the school of Mr. William James. But the doctrine of these
passages is ultra-pragmati