'The impregnable position of Science,' I there say, 'may be
stated in a few words. We claim, and we shall wrest from Theology,
the entire domain of Cosmological theory.' Thus Theology, so far as it
is represented by Mr. Martineau, and Science, so far as I understand
it, are in absolute harmony here.

But Mr. Martineau would have just reason to complain of me, if, by
partial citation, I left my readers under the impression that the
agreement between us is complete. At the opening of the eighty-ninth
Session of the Manchester New College, London, on October 6, '1874,
he, its principal, delivered an Address bearing the title 'Religion as
affected by Modern Materialism;' the references and general tone of
which make evident the depth of its author's discontent with my
previous deliverance at Belfast. I find it difficult to grapple with
the exact grounds of this discontent. Indeed, logically considered,
the impression left upon my mind by an essay of great aesthetic merit,
containing many passages of exceeding beauty, and many sentiments
which none but the pure in heart could utter as they are uttered here,
is vague and unsatisfactory. The author appears at times so brave and
liberal, at times so timid and captious, and at times, if I dare say
it, so imperfectly informed, regarding the position he assails.

At the outset of his Address Mr. Martineau states with some
distinctness his 'sources of religious faith.' They are two--'the
scrutiny of Nature' and 'the interpretation of Sacred Books.' It
would have been a theme worthy of his intelligence to have deduced
from these two sources his religion as it stands. But not another
word is said about the 'Sacred Books.' Having swept with the besom of
Science various 'books' contemptuously away, he does not define the
Sacred residue; much less give us the reasons why he deems them
sacred. [Footnote: Mr. Martineau's use of the term 'sacred' is
unintentionally misleading. In his later essays we are taught that he
does not mean to restrict it to the Bible. He does not, however,
mention the 'books' beyond those of the Bible to which he would apply
the term. 1879.] His references to 'Nature,' on the other hand, are
magnificent tirades against Nature, intended, apparently, to show the
wholly abominable character of man's antecedents if the theory of
evolution be true. Here also his mood lacks steadiness. While
joyfully accepting, at one place, 'the widening space, the deepenin