191 
Eev. A. C. Macpherson. — As a new and untried member of this In- 
stitute, I desire to offer two or three remarks upon the paper before us. 
The first thing I would point out is, that in my opinion some ot the 
statements contained in the paper might have been considerably amplified. 
There are some things which have not been made enough of, and there 
are one or two things also which have been made too much of. One of the 
things not made enough of was, the fact that the region of thought and 
action in which we have to decide on probable evidence, is very much larger 
than the region of thought and action where things can be demonstrably 
proved, and this will always give the claims of faith a great advantage 
over the claims of proved science. This point might, I think, have been 
made more of, because, when we have to exercise our judgment upon faith, 
the matter is one of much more importance than when we have to come to 
demonstraable conclusions. I was much struck with the argument of the 
paper, that faith moves in the region where man acts upon man by trust 
and confidence, rather than in the region of cold calculating intellect. 
However beautiful and symmetrical a man’s doctrines may be, his character 
and the sum total of his acts, will have far more influence than his words. 
Another point on which I wish to say something is in reference to the word 
“belief.” Philosophically, the word “belief,” like the words “subject” 
and “object,” is of very little consequence or importance. We say “I 
believe,” of things which are altogether out of the region of trust and 
confidence. I may say I believe the atomic theory, although that theory is 
not yet fully proved. The fact is, we want a word to express what is 
generally called “ belief,” as distinguished from “ knowledge.” Before we 
use the word “ belief,” we should distinguish the region in which we use it. 
The trust argument was a very strong one, but I think it was pressed too 
far, and the older we grow the more we shall see that the world teems with 
gigantic mistakes forced upon it by gigantic liars. The victims of these 
mistakes are to be numbered, not by millions, but by hundreds of millions, 
and it could not but have been well if those many millions had had 
the faculty of trying and estimating the evidence set before them. However, 
this faculty was not exercised, and to this fact the world is indebted for the 
progress of Mahommedanism, Buddhism, and all other false religions. 
We can only accept Professor Clifford’s paper however, within narrow limits. 
It is only just that something should be said on his side of the question, and 
though no doubt we should be far from saying with him that to believe without 
questioning is a great sin, which in the future shall cast a man into darkness 
and oblivion, yet nevertheless it is useful that a man should have and exercise 
the faculty of trying conclusions, and those who hold the Christian religion 
and the truths which we have been taught from our childhood upwards, should 
be the very first to desire anything of the kind. We believe that the more our 
religion is tested the more firmly it will be found to stand, and therefore I 
think that, within very narrow limits, Professor Clifford’s paper should be 
accepted. It is surely right to say that a man who can judge is wrong if he 
