MR. PEEK ON " REASONABLE FAITH."
(To TIM EDITOR OF FHB "SPEOTATOR.1
should not have thought of troubling you with any re- marks on your review of my article on "Reasonable Faith," ex- cept to ask you to correct a curious mistake your reviewer has fallen into through an asterisk having been misplaced. I have no doubt you will gladly insert this explanation, especially as it will be only just thus to relieve me from the extreme severity of your criticism, or at any rate, show that it applies equally to such celebrated reasonen as Babbage, Jevons, Stuart, and Tait.
You say Mr. Peek maintains the credibility of miracles by an-argument which may make reasoners despair, and ask for the hundredth time whether the doctrines must not be trusted to make their own way, and whether argument is not surplusage, and then quote the passage regarding Mr. Babbage's machine, apparently unconscious that the argument is not mine, but that of the late Mr. Babbage himself, quoted by Professors Stuart and Tait on page 90 of "The Unseen Universe ;" and approved by them "as a great advance upon the old idea, though incomplete without further explanation," and thus strongly approved by Jevons in his "Principles of Science," Vol. IL, page 438, in the following words, almost identical with my own :—" If such occurrences can be designed and foreseen by a human artist, it is surely within the capacity of the divine artist to provide for similar changes of law in the mechanism of the atom, or the con- struction of the heavens."—I am, Sir, &c.,
4 Pen church Street, B.C., March 13. FRANCIS PEEK.
Previous page
