quaking moss and turf; which nevertheless experience has proved secure and available. Thus a prejudice has always existed against Bishop Butler's argument, among those who most long for somewhat of inspiration, and watch most eagerly for direct tokens from above: a prejudice which of course exerts and realizes itself more, as the argument comes to touch more nearly on those transcendental and affecting truths, whereby Faith, if one may so say, lives and moves and has her being". "Possibly," "perhaps," "why should it not be so ?"-these and other like forms of speech, sound strangely cold and unmeaning to young and ardent spirits, trained to throw themselves, wholly and undoubtingly, on sacred words, which come to them with a thrilling conviction of the very doctrines which they now hear so languidly spoken of. It is a generous and devotional feeling; still it is feeling, not reason, and proceeds on an inadequate view of the necessary imperfection of this our mortal state.

Objectors of a somewhat different class may not improbably complain, that they are urged to believe certain doctrines, on the strength of certain analogies and figures, which for aught they know may be mere play of imagination. This makes them jealous and impatient: they wait not to consider the proper force of such topics, in confirming known truths and meeting objections, but discard Compare Anal. P. 2. c. v. §. 3. p. 273, 4.

b

them altogether, as alien to the clear light of the Gospel: forgetting that the great reasoner himself has plainly declared, that the proper force of analogy lies in answering objections, and that when positive, it is merely subsidiary to more direct arguments.

Yet a very little consideration will make it obvious, that by thus excepting against probabilities and analogies, men are in fact indefinitely narrowing the reach and extent of Faith as a principle of action. They are limiting it to a few great and trying moments and occasions: whereas it is clearly spoken of in Scripture as the mainspring of our ordinary life. For how few comparatively are the instances, in which men are able to act without any doubt or misgiving at all, or any notion that something may be said on both sides! Now all but such cases, on the hypothesis now mentioned, are taken out of the province of Faith.

And how is this consistent with holy Scripture? since" hope which is seen is not hope:" and "faith is the substance," the realizing, "of things hoped for," the "evidence, or making venture," of things not seen. When objects therefore, either earthly or heavenly, present themselves to the mind as distinctly as though they were seen, there is no room any longer for either hope or faith, properly so called. To say that probability, as opposed to intuition or demonstration, is the very guide of life and duty;-in other words, that moral questions must be decided by moral not

mathematical evidence ;-so far from excluding the action of a generous faith, is the only statement which gives faith unlimited scope.

Again to urge on a person the wisdom and duty of taking" the safe way," may sound indeed at first like cold calculation, but is practically a principle of faith, since it must ever issue in preferring eternity to time. Perhaps too, even metaphysically, it may imply a righteous Governor of the world: for how can there be any comparison of safe or unsafe, if all be left at random? And granting the comparison, why should we trust our own impressions about it, except through an instinctive faith in the veracity of one who caused us to have such impressions? Who knows but the like instinct may lie at the foundation of the whole way of reasoning from analogy? Bishop Butler has put the question without solving it, "Whence it proceeds that likeness should beget that presumption, opinion, and full conviction, which the human mind is formed to receive from it, and which it does necessarily produce in every one?" It seems not unnatural to say to one's self, Perhaps the tendency may arise from an instinct, unconsciously recognising His Presence and Power, Who actuates all things, and moves them by general laws. For example, our faith in the course of nature, in our own senses, or in our personal identity, when we come really to consider it, is scarcely intelligible but as faith in the God of

Nature," the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever." And so the very notion of reasoning at all from analogy may seem to stand on a religious basis.

There may possibly be other and deeper objections to the proposed application of Bishop Butler's principles, which also may be met on the other side by deeper and more searching replies. But it may not be useless thus briefly to have noticed these popular misapprehensions. Let us now revert to the first of them, which alone needs to be here examined in detail.

An apprehension then exists, that the principle of taking at all events" the safer way," being applied to our controversy with Roman Catholics, tells prima facie against the Anglican side. The Roman statement, put broadly and coarsely, is as follows. It is allowed by English Catholic Divines, such as Hooker, that a Roman Catholic, walking dutifully in the ways of his Church, is unquestionably within the kingdom and covenant of Christ, and therefore in a safe way, by God's mercy, towards everlasting salvation. On the other side, Roman theologians do by no means make the same concession to the English Church: they merely allow her sincere members the same plea of invincible ignorance, which they do not deny to the most uninstructed of the heathen. Upon this it is argued, and there is in the argument an air of

downright common sense, not unattractive to the English mind especially :-" The good Roman Catholic is safe, by consent of both parties: not so the good English Catholic: therefore a prudent person will lose no time in ranging himself on the side of the former."

The slightest consideration, however, shews, that the argument put in this form proves too much : for it would equally shew that Puritanism, or Mahometanism, or the ancient Donatism, or any other exclusive system, is the safer way: since we, I suppose, should not hesitate to hope and pronounce favourably of sincere and good persons, living and dying Puritans, or even Mahometans, simply through invincible ignorance: but they would stiffly, I imagine, deny that we, continuing as we are, could have any portion in God's mercy. This should be enough, surely, to prevent any, even the simplest, from being overpowered by the mere boldness of a system more exclusive than that to which himself belongs.

But there is more than this, it may be urged, in the statement we are now considering. The advocates for change may say, that they proceed not upon their own assertions, but upon our free concessions. "You enumerate," they may allege, "certain conditions of salvation ;-faith in the Creeds, partaking of the Sacraments, communion with the visible Church;-all which we plainly have, and many rites and doctrines besides, which