Claims to be grateful for Sidgwick's criticisms, and goes on to discuss his reaction to them. Refers to the 'sentence or two on Atkinson', to which Sidgwick had referred. Contends that 'modern science, correlation of forces and Darwinian theory included, has not in the smallest degree altered the logical weights in the Theistic problem.' Comments that Laplace's remark itself 'shows that it was as easy to him as it is to Darwin to dispense with the idea of a Personal God.' Discusses the relationship between the 'field of Law' and Theism. Claims that 'the scientific idolatory of unknown "Forces" is just as seductive and as atheistic in the age of Epicurus' as it is in the present day, and asserts that 'the problem is Metaphysical, not Physical, and is unaffected by the advance of Physical Science.' Concludes this point by claiming that a change in the text on this issue to suit Sidgwick's feelings on the subject would be untrue to him [Martineau]. On Sidgwick's advice he has 'struck out the reference to [Miss] Proct[er], but 'cannot let F. Newman go.' Refers to the 'great circulation of Newman's books (The Soul and he Phases)', which seems to give sufficient support to his impression, but admits that his reputation as an '"unbeliever" closes against him an immense circle of readers acceptable to his brother's books.' Claims to agree with Sidgwick's criticism '(up to the last line)' of his sentiments 'in pp 20, 21', but cannot see how that criticism applies. Clarifies that he did not intend to imply that 'without Piety, Charity is impossible', and discusses the relation between these two 'affections'. Stresses that 'it is only to the corporate use of dogma' that he objects, and admits that, for the individual who can think out his beliefs into clear statement, 'the process may be very important.' Claims he has tried to add a little emphasis to the reasons on which Sidgwick dwells for using the word "Christian", but believes that all of them are present in the text.
