442 
nature of the diseases which the physician has to cure. The clergyman who 
is called on to deal with such cases of conscience feels, when he goes to the 
hooks, that they are not wholesome for his own soul, and he goes as a surgeon 
or physician would go into a dissecting-room. 
Rev. Dr. Rigg. — If Mr. Mitchell’s remarks did not apply to what fell from 
Dr. Irons, they must apply to what I said, or they are altogether irrelevant. 
Now I had no idea of sending people to books of casuistry to learn the 
treatment of extraordinary cases of conscience. The thought never entered 
my mind. All -I intended was this, — let people who preach expound moral 
philosophy, and those who preach Christian duties expound Christian ethics, 
so that the clear and true comprehension of all that is included in ethics 
may eventually come within the scope of the common apprehension. 
Mr. Reddie. — It may be as well for us to remember that books of casuistry 
generally deal with immoralities, and not with the proper subjects of ethics. 
Aristotle calls ethics the science of virtue, and it is the virtues and not the 
vices of man that ethics teach. With regard to popularizing these things, 
I think Mr. Mitchell is unorthodox to this extent, that St. Paul decidedly 
speaks “ of those who have their senses exercised to discern both good and 
evil,” showing that he considered that virtue was not only a habit, but that it 
required training, and that the mind ought to be trained to understand these 
things. We have therefore scriptural warrant for such work. 
Rev. Mr. Row. — This meeting seems likely to break up under some illu- 
sion. I do not think casuistry is a portion of ethical philosophy at all ; if it 
is, it is an exceedingly subordinate one. Ethics deal with the whole system 
of motivity. Mr. Mitchell seems to think we cannot act upon the masses by 
ethical philosophy ; but, surely, if our clergy get their minds enlarged to 
understand the Gospel better, they will be better fitted to teach the 
people. 
Rev. W. Mitchell. — I have only one more remark to make : the Pro- 
fessor of Moral Philosophy at Cambridge is called the Professor of 
Casuistry. 
Rev. Sir Tilson Marsh. — The principles of ethical philosophy are eternal, 
and therefore they are anterior to writen revelation. They are inherent in 
the very nature of the Supreme Being. The distinctions between right and 
wrong are eternal principles ; and when the nature of man was created, 
there was infused into the inferior nature by the Creative Power those 
inherent principles. That man has gone wrong has been due to the will. 
There is in the mind of man a sense of right and wrong ; and the point 
where the machinery has got out of gear has been in the human will. 
Men know what is right, but they do not do it : they do not wish to do 
it, and that is why they do it not. With reference to Oxford, I will make 
only one remark, drawn from my own experience of many years, in close 
connection with many very superior Oxford men. The fault in our training 
there has been, not that we have led men to study closely the Aristotelian 
philosophy. By no means has that been the fault — it has been part of the 
