Equally it should be observed that religion, considered as something more than a mere ethical and moral code, would be in no way freed from the necessity of justifying itself, _qua_ religion, by the acceptance, however unanimous, of this or any other hypothesis. Such justification is a matter for an apologetic of quite another order, of which order, by the way, I regard Mr. Chesterton's "Orthodoxy" mentioned above as a very admirable example. What the general acceptance of such an hypothesis would do, would be finally and for ever to deprive the materialist of the possibility of maintaining that matter, as he knows it, is the final and only permanent reality and that Spirit therefore cannot exist. It is true that this would only involve driving him back one stage. If we suppose for the sake of argument that we could finally attain to as complete a knowledge of the "next world" as we at present possess of this, he could always return to the attack, using with regard to that state the same arguments as he originally used with regard to this. But having once broken through the ring fence of matter and demonstrated that there exist other realities of which he was at one time entirely ignorant, he could never deny that there might still be realms as yet unknown to him. He could never catch us again, so to speak. I admit that the above is a somewhat fantastical supposition and scarcely within the sphere of practical politics, but the point is, that until we are prepared to give an intelligible explanation of things we are pent up in a sort of intellectual _cul-de-sac_ bounded by matter. We may know, as the result of personal experience, that there is a way out, that matter is not the only reality; but our knowledge is a purely personal affair and the scientist is perfectly entitled, if he wishes, to decline to take the steps that led to the experiences which have convinced us, to dismiss them as mere hallucinations and to write off our alleged "revelations" as superstitious myths. But let us once demonstrate to him, in a manner calculated to appeal to his intellect, that there may be a non-material reality and the _cul-de-sac_ is at once broken through and becomes a vista. It may be one of which we cannot see the end, and we shall certainly require faith to believe that it leads to the right destination, but the point is that it _is_ a vista and not a _cul-de-sac_. This is where I am convinced that the adoption of some hypothesis of the same general order as that which I have been advocating would prove of definite value to the Church and that is why I am so strongly of opinion that the Church, by which term I mean more especially those whose business it is to concern themselves with the general trend of Christian policy with regard to contemporary thought, ought to encourage and not to deprecate or oppose attempts on these lines.