REASONABLE FAITH. IN Na recent number of this REVIEW Mr. Clifford remarks that "it is wrong" "to believe upon insufficient evidence;" and that if any should reply, "I have no time to investigate," "then he should have no time to believe."* There is, no doubt, much truth in the view thus forcibly expressed, for no excuse of want of time can release any person of ordinary ability from the duty of carefully investigating the foundations of that which he professes to believe. But there is also a manifest fallacy in this reasoning, at least in the view of those who hold that the Christian Revelation was intended, not only for the wise and learned, but equally for the poor and simple; for we regard it as one strong argument in proof of its Divine origin that while it sustains uninjured the fiercest criticism of the sceptic, and adapts itself to the advancing discoveries of the philosopher, it is also recognized by sincere, though unlearned men, as responding to the deepest cravings and highest aspirations of their nature. There is much force in the reply put by the American novelist into the mouth of the Christian slave, who, being appealed to by his sceptical master to justify his confidence as an unlearned man in the truth of a belief, which the former, with his learning, could not receive; replied, "Ah, master, I feel it, I feel it to be true." It is the writer's purpose in the following pages to accept the challenge apparently given in Mr. Clifford's article to men engaged in commerce, and other various occupations apart from theology and literature, to come forward * CONTEMPORARY REVIEW for January, 1877: Ethics of Belief. and defend what appears to them the reasonableness of their faith, and endeavour to examine, in the same condition of mind in which such persons weigh evidence and decide upon the daily difficulties that meet them in the business of life, first the objections raised by sceptical writers against, and then the cumulative evidence in favour of, the Scripture revelation. In carrying out this intention no excuse need be made for the use of arguments already familiar to the students of Butler, Paley, Chalmers, the Duke of Argyll, and many other champions of the faith, for it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to find entirely new arguments either on one side or the other. The objections are mostly but old enemies in new forms, adapted to modern modes of thought; and indeed it is often a matter of conjecture, in reading such essays as the "Ethics of Belief," whether the writers could ever have read the works of Paley and Butler, who long since demolished the arguments that are now brought forward, with a little change of dress, as original discoveries. The object of the present essay will be, while using the vast wealth of argument accumulated, to condense it for the need of this busy age, and to place it in that form which has proved most convincing to the mind of the writer. No subject can equal the importance of the one now before us; namely, the answer to the question, Is this brief life, in which success is so rare, and even success so generally ends in disappointment, which begins with the infant's wail of pain, is, through the short time it lasts, full of trial and trouble,-sometimes of great physical or mental suffering, and which ends so often in its prime, amid the pain of disappointed hopes and the anguish of broken hearts, just as character has been matured by discipline, and the mind has become rich in knowledge and experience ;is this indeed all, or at least all that is sufficiently certain to claim the attention of reasonable men? Or, on the other hand, Is there satisfactory evidence that this life is not all, but only a period of probation and discipline needful for man, and perfectly consistent with Divine goodness and wisdom? The former view, at least in its practical influence, is without doubt very prevalent, as is shown not less in the secularization of education abroad, and the contempt with which religion is openly treated by many leading professors in foreign universities, than in the disposition of so many at home as well as abroad, in alarm at the progress of these views, to seek rest from painful mental conflict in the arms of that Church which claims "infallibility;" and, perhaps, in a still greater degree in the general indifference to religion which prevails so extensively among young persons of all classes, leading them to reject the old forms of faith with little examination, and to adopt, instead, a fanciful religion of their own, with a code of morals adapted to the current opinion of those with whom they associate. In an able essay on "The Courses of Religious Thought,"* Mr. Gladstone brought forward a formidable list of various developments of scepticism, which however appear, practically, to resolve themselves into three-namely, those which deny the necessity, though they may not deny the possibility, of a Creator; those which acknowledge God, but entirely reject revelation; and, lastly, those which accept the ethics of the Bible, but, more or less, reject its historical truth, and its claim to inspiration. In considering this subject the thoughtful student of sceptical literature can hardly fail, at the outset, to be struck by the apparent inconsistency of many of those writers, who, while professing philanthropy, yet set themselves, at the cost of much labour, to destroy all existing forms of belief, although acknowledging the excellence of the moral teaching of Christianity, and admitting the fact that it supplies strength to hundreds of thousands, amid pain and sorrow, and in death itself unspeakable comfort and peace. It cannot but appear unphilosophical and cruel thus gratuitously to take away such joy and consolation in trouble, and such inducements to excellence of character and virtuous conduct, as the Christian faith yields, when confessedly those who would be its destroyers, have no truer consolation to offer and no more constraining motive to present as a substitute. In proceeding to examine these developments of unbelief, the first which comes under our notice is that which denies the necessity, though it may not deny the possibility, of a personal Creator. This form, though comparatively rare, is yet to some extent openly professed, while its unacknowledged influence is very considerable, and we must therefore examine it, however useless it may be to attempt to convince by argument those who, while capable of comprehending the wondrous indications of skill, adaptation, and intelligence daily more clearly revealed by science, are yet capable of attributing these combinations of power and high intelligence to chance or the "fortuitous combination of atoms, moved by physical forces." It is difficult to realize the fact that any reasonable man, not utterly blinded by prejudice, can study the most elementary book of science—say on physiology—that he can contemplate the human frame in its wonderful structure of bone, sinew, and muscle, all arranged on the most perfect mechanical principles; trace the numberless contrivances necessary to make the body available to the possessor-such as the exquisitely arranged system of blood-vessels, veins, and capillaries, the nerves and glands, and those seemingly complicated contrivances connected with the digestion and the action of the heart; with all the curious arrangements by which the separation of exhausted blood is accomplished, and the numberless * CONTEMPORARY REVIEW for June, 1876. valves, muscles, and membranes necessary for the work; and hold such a theory. Or, again, that he should consider the way in which, by "osmosis," the good blood is enabled to supply nourishment to the body, and the worn-out particles are carried off; and then proceed to calculate the "probabilities," first, that each of these contrivances was formed separately by chance, and secondly, that by "fortuitous combination" they fitted themselves into the exact places required. Or, again, that he should examine the human eye-examination of which might alone be a cure for atheism that wondrous organ which grasps within its scope the landscape, paints it upon a point the size of a pin's head, and is so alike in each person that a similar idea of the scene is conveyed to the brain of every beholder; or the marvellous structure of the ear, which can recognize harmony or discord among the millions of vibrations of the air produced at an instrumental concert, and distinguish from a hundred other sounds the notes struck upon a piano separated from the ear by a solid brick wall; or, still further, calculate the absolute requirements of the body and the corresponding supplies provided for it in earth, in air, and in water; and yet feel any doubt whence all originated. To those who accept the faith that the world was made by the power of God, every science brings confirmatory evidence of the strongest kind-whether it be that which reveals the of the stars, or that which shows how the wayside flowers, trees, and plants, growing in beauty for our use and enjoyment, draw their nourishment from carbonic acid gas that has been given off as waste by the animal creation, and restore it again in forms necessary for man's life and sustenance; but it would indeed be vain to expect to convince by words those who can calmly contemplate these and the other wonders of the creation, and yet accept the irrational suggestion that they came into existence and arranged themselves into the exquisite and perfect order in which we find them by "fortuitous combination" and "natural selection." One thing is beyond doubt that no sane man would accept such reasoning regarding the phenomena and occurrences of daily life, or would look upon any person who could do so as a reasonable being. It must not be supposed that we are here insinuating that any large number of those who hold even extreme views upon the doctrine of evolution hold also such ideas as are objected to in the foregoing pages. For the most part, while their writings appear to suggest this conclusion, the question as to the First Cause seems rather ignored by them; and so long as it is admitted that the origin of all things comes from the mind of a Divine Creator, we need not trouble ourselves, even though it were proved that all inanimate creation originated in a "concourse of atoms," or in atoms and ether, and that all living beings have sprung from one germ. Such a conclusion is at present not proved; but if such were the case, it would but enhance the wondrous miracle of creation. No truly scientific man will maintain the absurdity that anything could have been evolved from a germ except that which, in its possibility, the germ already contained; and therefore the conclusion that the creation was evolved thus, would only prove that the Creator, instead of making separately the varieties of creation, created them potentially in one rudimental form, ordaining that, at different periods and under diverse circumstances, each species should evolve from the preceding. Let it be granted, then, that all living beings, from the insect which crawls upon the ground to the eagle which flies in the heavens, and the complex human form which walks erect upon the face of the earth, have been developed from one tiny germ, in which all the attributes of each species must have been enfolded --this plainly detracts nothing from the miracle of creation; but would, if true, be a far greater marvel than that which we generally understand to be the Scripture record of the event. We consider the mechanic skilful who can make a perfect chronometer; but we should count him ten thousand times more so if he could make a watch capable, by evolution, of developing many varieties. Therefore while at present, without doubt, the various theories of Darwin and others contain great truths, and, to ordinary minds, still greater incredibilities, yet even should the extreme views regarding the "evolution" of species prove true, there would be no conflict in them with the reasonable faith that the world was made by the wisdom and power of God, and that those things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Leaving, now, the believers in the seemingly incredible system of auto-genesis, we propose to consider the views held by that very much larger number who, while acknowledging the existence of a Creator, deny the possibility or the fact of a Divine revelation, and determine, in the spirit of Confucius, that as it is impossible, scientifically, to prove the existence of a God, or, if there be one, His character or the nature of His government, it is the part of a wise man to abstain from troubling his mind on the subject, and to devote himself rather to get the greatest advantage from the realities of life, regarding which there can be no doubt. We shall endeavour to prove that, even were the Christian revelation untrue, such agnosticism is without excuse, since Nature itself reveals the character of God; and then pass on to show that one of the strongest proofs of the reasonableness of the Christian faith is, that it is in perfect accord with Nature's revelation, which it does little more than amplify, explain, and enforce. Let us endeavour to look upon the world as spectators, seeking, |