Sec. 2.  DEFINITION OF TERMS AND PURPOSE OF THIS TREATISE.

[To understand George Romanes’ mind close attention must be paid to the following section.  Also to the fact, not explicitly noticed by him, that he uses the word ‘reason’ (see p. 112) in a sense closely resembling that in which Mr. Kidd has recently used it in his Social Evolution.  He uses it, that is, in a restricted sense as equivalent to the process of scientific ratiocination.  His main position is therefore this:  Scientific ratiocination cannot find adequate grounds for belief in God.  But the pure agnostic must recognize that God may have revealed Himself by other means than that of scientific ratiocination.  As religion is for the whole man, so all human faculties may be required to seek after God and find Him—­emotions and experiences of an extra-’rational’ kind.  The ‘pure agnostic’ must be prepared to welcome evidence of all sorts.—­ED.]

It is desirable to be clear at the outset as to the meaning which I shall throughout attach to certain terms and phrases.

Theism.

It will frequently be said, ‘on the theory of Theism,’ ’supposing Theism true,’ &c.  By such phrase my meaning will always be equivalent to—­’supposing, for the sake of argument, that the nearest approach which the human mind can make to a true notion of the ens realissimum, is that of an inconceivably magnified image of itself at its best.’

Christianity.

Similarly, when it is said, ‘supposing Christianity true,’ what will be meant is—­’supposing for the sake of argument, that the Christian system as a whole, from its earliest dawn in Judaism, to the phase of its development at the present time, is the highest revelation of Himself which a personal Deity has vouchsafed to mankind.’  This I intend to signify an attitude of pure agnosticism as regards any particular dogma of Christianity—­even that of the Incarnation.

Should it be said that by holding in suspense any distinctive dogma of Christianity, I am not considering Christianity at all, I reply, Not so; I am not writing a theological, but a philosophical treatise, and shall consider Christianity merely as one of many religions, though, of course, the latest, &c.  Thus considered, Christianity takes its place as the highest manifestation of evolution in this department of the human mind; but I am not concerned even with so important an ecclesiastical dogma as that of the Incarnation of God in Christ.  As far as this treatise has to go, that dogma may or may not be true.  The important question for us is, Has God spoken through the medium of our religious instincts?  And although this will necessarily involve the question whether or how far in the case of Christianity there is objective evidence of His having spoken by the mouth of holy men [of the Old Testament] which have been since the world began, such will be the case only because it is a question of