245 
therefore the mere fact that scepticism is attended by sorrow would in 
itself not be an argument against it. Scepticism is a disease, and you 
must go to the cause of it. It is of no use telling a man under these un- 
favourable conditions that he would be better out of them. He cannot help 
them. He is involved in sceptical conditions. I should have preferred to 
see in this paper a bolder and more enlightened treatment of the question. 
We all know that scepticism exists, and that it is very prevalent, but what 
can be the practical result or use of saying, “ If you accept scepticism, you 
must accept a system of sorrow.” I desire, however, to express a general 
approbation of the paper, and of the excellent manner in which it has 
been placed before us, but I really would urge Dr. Thornton to tell us in his 
reply the cause of scepticism and the best mode of treating it. 
Mr. J. Kendall. — The last speaker seems to have forgotten that the 
paper which has been read to-night only deals with one-third part of the 
question.* My exception to it is of a very different character. I was sorry 
to find some expressions in the paper which are not worthy of so able 
a man as Dr. Thornton ; he does not quite do justice to the position nor to the 
views of sceptics. On the very first page I find him saying : “ The sceptic, 
in general, has, intentionally or unintentionally, so shaped his arguments 
as to appear to aim rather at inducing men to quit their profession of 
Christianity, than at demonstrating the truth of his own principles.” On 
the second page he says of scepticism : “ Its history is not ennobling nor 
even respectable,” and so on through several other pages, speaking of “ its 
shiftiness,” its being “ confused together,” et cetera. I was much struck 
with the contrast afforded to this style of writing by that of Farrar’s 
“ Life of Christ,” where I find this passage, in reference to scepticism, — Dr. 
Farrar writing distinctly, be it remembered, as a believer to believers : — 
“ Let me here say at once that I hope to use no single word of anger or de- 
nunciation against a scepticism which I know to be in many cases perfectly 
honest and self-sacrificingly noble.” Dr. Thornton, I think, does injustice to 
his own position, when he will not allow to the sceptic, motives, quite as good 
as his own, and a sacrifice quite as great, though the sceptic arrives at 
different conclusions. But the purpose for which I rose was to bring forward 
a strong illustration of the soundness of the general view contained in the 
paper. In reading the life and letters of Niebuhr I came across a passage 
which well illustrates the sorrows of scepticism. Niebuhr was an unbeliever, 
and one of the most eminent ; but, writing to a lady, afterwards his wife, 
about the education of his son, he says : — “ He shall believe in the letter of 
the Old and New Testaments ; and I shall nurture in him from his infancy 
a firm faith in all that I have lost, or feel uncertain about .” — Life and Letters, 
* The paper is the fourth or concluding portion of the arguments 
brought forward in the Author’s Papers on “ The Logic of Scepticism,” 
“ The Credulity of Scepticism,” and “ The Varying Tactics of Scepticism ” ; 
read in 1866, 1869, and 1874. (See note, p. 234.) — Ed. 
