351 



criticism, I do not think it is true, as Mr. Titcomb says, that we are called 

 on to use scholarship to assist facts ; but when once we have arrived at such 

 a thing, Christianity claims for itself an authoritative and dogmatic statement, 

 which refers after all to the testimony of a divine commission. There is one 

 thing at the beginning of Mr. Howard's paper which I heard with much 

 satisfaction, which was his statement, that, after all, how very little had 

 been proved. I think we shall find, as we go on in life, that those who have 

 given most time, and thought, and study to these matters will confess that 

 they have made greater proficiency in ascertaining the extent of their own 

 ignorance than in anything else. When clever men bring certain facts before 

 the world, I still have the greatest satisfaction in feeling that, after all, very 

 little has been proved, and that it is a great blessing that we have our 

 primitive revelation, making known facts which are not known by reason, 

 but which come direct from the Great First Cause. (Cheers.) 



Mr. A. V. Newton. — I do not know whether I misunderstood one part of 

 the argument in the paper, but it seems to me that the writer has built 

 upon the fact that we cannot prove the existence of the luminiferous ether, 

 and notwithstanding that we cannot prove it absolutely, we know it to 

 exist ; and upon that he raises the argument that we may believe there is a 

 spiritual world, although we cannot prove it. I do not know whether my 

 understanding of the argument is really a misunderstanding, but I should 

 be glad to know whether it is or not. We know quite well of the existence 

 of light, and it may possibly be that light could not exist without there being 

 such a thing as luminiferous ether ; but it does not appear to me that we 

 can get any safe deduction, such as the existence of the spiritual world, from 

 a belief that something exists which is the cause of something else existing 

 of which we have a proof. 



Mr. Row. — It is an answer to an objection, is it not ? We cannot prove 

 the existence of the luminiferous ether, but yet we believe it does exist ; 

 therefore something may exist which we cannot prove. Mr. Howard's object 

 is to show that we may believe a thing, although it is beyond the region of 

 proof ; and that seems to me to be a very good illustration, as I understand it. 



Rev. J. W. Buckley. — My great difficulty in these discussions is, that we 

 do not seem to have very good starting-points. In mathematics we have 

 axioms and postulates, and we know what we are about. I confess that, 

 whether it is from ignorance or credulity, I cannot help believing in the ex- 

 istence both of a material and of a spiritual world. I do not know how to 

 disbelieve it. We have certain intuitive powers given to us, almost like 

 instinct. For instance, if anybody tells me this chair does not exist, but is 

 merely an impression coming to the eye and mind, then there is no such 

 thing as matter. I think we must start with the idea that there is a material 

 world ; for unless you grant me that, I have nothing at all to base my logic 

 upon ; and such a discussion as this, however interesting, becomes almost 

 useless. The paper seems to me to say that we have not proved some material 

 things at all, and yet that we must admit them ; that we must suppose there 

 is an atmosphere and a luminiferous ether, though we have no proof of it 



