39 
Dr. Irons. — 1 beg to say that the Vicar of Bromptoii has never joined 
any party yet, — be it religious or otherwise. (Hear.) 
Mr. Row. — I never said that you had. I merely mentioned as an illustra- 
tion of what I meant when I said that I should prefer dealing with Dr. Irons 
as an individual, to dealing with him in his corporate capacity, in perpetual 
succession, as the corporation sole of the vicarage of Brompton. (Laughter.) 
I will conclude by making an observation or two with reference to Dr. Irons’s 
statement in respect to the ancient philosophers. I agree with him in what 
he says with respect to the difficulty which the ancient philosophers were 
under when dealing with morals, from having no other standard of duty than 
that which was due to the State, and which necessarily led them to view 
morals under a political aspect ; but another reason which induced them to 
view them under a political aspect Dr. Irons has not alluded to, and that is 
that they felt that they had no sufficient moral force to bring to bear upon 
human nature in order to induce it to do what was right, and they thought 
that the only moral force was that which was created by the State ; and 
there is no speculator or ancient moralist with whose writings I am 
acquainted who has not proposed to create an ideal state. Aristotle, 
Plato, and other philosophers, every one of them, found it necessary to 
adopt the principle of an ideal state, in which they hope to form a society 
of men who by being brought up under suitable laws, would have some 
chance of becoming virtuous. Now this is a very important point, because 
it bears witness to one great fact in Christianity. Christianity alone has 
fulfilled the philosophic aspirations. When Christianity came into the world, 
the whole was complete. Then were fulfilled all the speculations of Aristotle, 
Plato, and other philosophers, we may truly say, by the creation of the 
Christian Church. But Dr. Irons, I cannot help thinking, has made rather 
too strong a reference to the fact that wrongdoers have a strong feeling of 
self-consciousness. I am prepared to admit that in many cases conscience does 
condemn wrong- doers, and that they have given themselves up to justice 
under its influence, but at the same time there is such a persistence of wrong- 
doing that it destroys in some men all perception of right and wrong. I have 
been recently reading the history of Philip the Second of Spain, and if we 
reflect upon all his violence, his murders, his persecutions, his known predi- 
lection for lying and assassination, and that there was no kind of crime 
which he scrupled at perpetrating, it is a fearful thing to think that that 
man by a continued persistence in crime had so destroyed his consciousness 
of right and wrong, that when on his death-bed he thought that he had done 
everything which was acceptable to God. That is a strong fact, showing 
how persistence in wrong-doing blunts the conscience, and that men sunk in 
crime are not always subject to feelings of remorse. (Hear, hear.) 
Rev. David Greig. — I perfectly agree with the paper which has been 
read. It seems to me that it is an especially able and excellent pape'r, and 
one which is very useful and very needful in these times. What strikes me 
as one of its chief excellencies is the symmetry with which Dr. Irons has 
arranged the different points of his argument. They are so beautifully con- 
