LETTER XIV.

MY DEAR FRIend,

I PROPOSE, in this letter, to offer a very brief abstract of arguments which led me to reject the doctrine of Transubstantiation, and which induce me still to persevere in that rejection. In a former letter, I made some passing allusion to the evidence of the senses, which the advocates of this tenet are compelled to impugn. I must now beg you to look at the subject more closely. The illustrious Catholic, PASCAL, that "prodigy of parts," whose name I often heard you pronounce with reverence, and whose " Thoughts" are eagerly read by many Roman Catholics, remarks, with his accustomed oracular wisdom, that "the dogmatist is confounded by reason, and the sceptic by nature."* Sound logic will detect and refute the most subtle fallacies of the sophist, and expose to contempt the presumptuous ignorance of the dogmatic; while the irresistible evidence of the senses, the voice of nature, or rather the voice of GOD, equally intelligible to the savage and the sage, will "rebuke, with all

*La Raison confond les Dogmatistes, et la Nature les Sceptiques."

GROUNDS OF BELIEF.

251

authority," the puerility and the petulence of scepticism.

It is a melancholy fact, in the history of the human mind, that the dictates of common sense have been as little regarded in science as in religion; and that the philosopher, no less than the fanatic, has sought to extinguish "the candle of the Lord" in the soul of man, as a necessary preliminary to the successful establishment of his favourite theory.

"To build religion upon scepticism, is the most extravagant of all attempts; for it destroys the proofs of a divine mission, and leaves no natural means of distinguishing between revelation and imposture. The Abbe Lamennais represents authority as the sole ground of belief. Why? If any reason can be given the proposition must be false. If none, it is obviously a mere groundless assertion."*

It was the fashion of the ancient sceptics to discard the evidence of the senses, and to contend that there was no certainty in human knowledge. Actuated by similar principles, the celebrated DESCARTES, when he undertook to build upa new system of philosophy, determined to take nothing for granted--not even his own existence! With

* Sir James Mackintosh, Enc. Brit. Prelim. Dis. Note Q.

him, this fact was a matter of logical deduction. His only assumption was an act of the mind, cogito, ergo sum. "I think," said he, "therefore I exist." A notable discovery! But, after all his care, this was a palpable begging of the question. However, he went on from this point, proving that he had a body, that there was a universe, and a God. And when he had thus ascertained the existence of God, he was satisfied, from the known goodness of his Creator, that his senses were not given to deceive him; and, therefore, that their evidence is to be relied on. Mr. LOCKE, the great reformer of mental philosophy, exerted his powerful talents to evince that the ideas in our minds, and not the things which they represent, are the objects of knowledge. Then came Bishop BERKLEY, and taking up the same theory about ideas, clearly proved that there is no such thing as matter; that our bodies, our friends, houses, lands, the earth, the luminaries of heaven, are nothing but ideas in the mind!

After him arose DAVID HUME, and boldly pushed the ideal system to its legitimate conclusion, demonstrating, that as there is no matter, neither is there any mind—that there is neither body nor soul, neither heaven nor hell, neither God nor devil. Such a conclusion, fairly de

REASON AND FAITH.

253

duced from the orthodox philosophy of the day, astounded all sober-minded men, and aroused the energies of the illustrious REID, who attacked the atheistical system at the foundation, and demolished it completely. He appealed to the common sense of mankind; established the authority of the senses; proved that they were given us by our gracious Creator, not to deceive and mislead us, but to be our infallible guides; and that we are so constituted by GoD, that the existence of those things which are the objects of our senses, irresistibly forces itself on our minds as a first principle, which none can question but idiots or maniacs. Thus the mental bondage of centuries was broken-a mighty strong-hold was recovered from the enemy-a powerful obstacle to human improvement rolled out of the way. What Bacon achieved for the physical sciences, Reid accomplished for intellectual and moral philosophy-furnishing a noble illustration of the maxim of Pascal, already quoted ;-By force of reasoning he confounded the dogmatists, and the sceptics he silenced by appealing to nature.

I am happy, my dear Sir, to be able to adduce the authority of Pascal on the present occasion. I hope it will have due weight on your candid mind. I shall quote another of his maxims :—

P

"If we shock the principles of reason, our religion will be absurd and ridiculous." Again: "Faith speaks clearly where the senses are silent, but never contradicts them. It is above them, but not opposed to them."*

Who

Now, this is the very distinction that Protestants are so anxious to establish. There are many things quite beyond our comprehension, of whose existence, nevertheless, we have not the slightest doubt. Such, for instance, is the union of body and mind in our own persons. has ever explained the nature of this mysterious connexion? or disclosed the secrets of volition and bodily motion? Yet these things we know as matters of fact, from consciousness and experience. Thus there is an impenetrable veil drawn over many of the works of God, whose results are most familiar to us. They are beyond the reach of reason; but they do not contradict it. Their hidden springs we cannot trace; but could we follow them in their subtle operations, they would at once commend themselves to the understanding as displays of consummate wisdom.

"Si on choque les principes de la raison, notre religion sera absurde et ridicule." "La foi dit bien ce que les sens ne disent pas, mais jamais le contraire. Elle est au dessus et non pas contre." Pensées de M. Pascal. ch. 5.