SCEPTICISM.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 765, 29 October 1886, Page 24

SCEPTICISM.

Scepticism is a deplorable thing, especially when it leaves the mind on a stormy sea without anchor or hope of haven. It does not probably prevail any more in these days than it did in the past, but we hear more of it because of the publicity given by the secular press. Some minds are so constituted that they cannot accept anything without proof, and yet , they do not necessarily demand that the proof shall have the stamp of highest authority. They recognise merit for itself, and accept it gladly, knowing that eventually it must gain general recognition. The legal and medical profession, as well as the ecclesiastical, are slow to adopt what may conflict with their notions of self-interest and right. New ideas are almost always disturbing, but eventually they become assimilated, and are warmly commended. The case of Rev. J. Wheatley, a talented clergyman of North Ipswich, Queensland, suggests these observations. He got into a desperate condition, which thoroughly unfitted him for ministerial work. His mind, sympathising with his body, became very much depressed. As the mind is, so the thoughts are. He finally put himself under the care of the best London specialists. For several years he pursued the ever fleeting phantom, but at last they told him that his case was beyond amendment. Still more thorou.hly depressed, he grew sceptical to a degree, and believed himself doomed. Providentially, however, he had his attention drawn to a widely-reported means of restoration in cases like his own, and reluctantly began its use. To use his own words : —About two years ago I began to be troubled with a very serious complaint, which the doctors described as chronic disease of the kidneys and bladder —the result of scarlet fever. My doctor had a consultation with two _of the leading physicians in England—one was the senior consulting physician of Guy s Hospital, London. I also consulted several others, and they plainly told me that medical science had no remedy for my complaint, and that another English winter would finish me. At that time my water contained a large percentage of aibumen and renal tube casts. I came to Australia to avoid the damp climate of England, and was beginning to despair of all hope when my attention was called to Dean Gunn’s manly and straightforward testimony to the value of Warner’s safe cure. I gave it a trial, and the result is satisfactory indeed, for I am now better than I have been for years, and am able to do my work with perfect ease. I have also witnessed its remarkable healing virtues in one very bad case of kidney disease in my parish.—(Signed), J. Wheatley, Incumbent of North Ipswich, Queensland, formerly Curate of St. Mark’s, Magdalen, Torquay, Devon, England. It is only fair to remark, though it may be unusual for papers editorially to do so, that Warner's safe cure is the remedy that saved Mr Wheatley’s life, to which lie bears every willing testimony. And when we see it publicly endorsed by such eminent persons of quality as the Right Rev. Bishop Edward Wilson, of Canada, the Rev. Richard Brown, of Yarraville, Victoria, the Rev Father Kelly, of Yass, N.S.W., R. Henry Davis, Missionary of Kobe, Japan, the Rev. Thomas J. Bryant, of 1 Myrtle place, London road, Bognor, Sussex, the Rev. James Brierly, M.A., CongletoD, and others equally wellknown, we unhesitatingly commend it to the favor of our readers. 37