In the estimation of many educated and unprejudiced persons, the fabric of Church[17] government seems to have its origin in the perverted imaginations of men rather than in the ethical teaching of Christ, so far as this can be ascertained by a careful study of the books constituting the New Testament. Considering the discrepancies in the various sayings and doings of Christ as reported by the authors of those several books, the solution of the question as to what He really said and did becomes very difficult, and is complicated in all branches and phases of the history of the Christian Faith by subsequent accretions, finding their origins in the superstitions of the age, and for which no reasonable warrant seems to exist. We have, therefore, in an endeavour to reconcile the teaching of the Church with the supposed teaching of Christ, to fall back on the internal evidence of the intrinsic truth contained in His accepted sayings and doings. Acceptance of these as true occurrences depends upon how far they are consistent with established scientific facts. Truth is Truth, whether its unveiling to the[18] understanding be achieved by Science or Religion. Investigation of the evidence of a supposed truth either, by certifying its verity, leads to its surer stability, with proportionate increase of honour; or, by tracing and eliminating error, gives higher value to the remaining purified residue. If the supposed teaching of Christ were found to be consistent with the modern teaching of Science, the mutual endorsement would be a further guarantee of the verity of the question in point, both in its religious and its scientific aspect. But if an examination of Christian doctrine reveals the presence of dogma utterly irreconcilable with known scientific facts, then, if the cry for Truth raised by both teachers is sincere, the rejection of that which defiles Truth is incumbent upon the disciples of Religion as well as upon those of Science.