loath to disturb what is so intimately connected with the religious belief of so many; as one would hesitate to draw his bow against a serpent entwined around the form he loves. As a philosopher, he might respect the error which works in the cause of truth. Superstition is the floating robe of religion, and, as of old, there is often virtue in the vesture of the divine."

"If you admit the falsity of the notion," said Mr. Tyler, I would oppose it, as I would every deviation from the strictest truth. It is the nature of error to expand. The admission of small errors into systems of truth has been the greatest enemy of truth in all ages; and the reason why right has never become triumphant and permanent, is that its defenders have not been jealous of its connexions-have not sternly beaten down the parasite twigs of falsehood which delight to fasten around it. Error is nepotistic, and wherever it enters it brings in its whole family."

"It seems to me," said I, "that there are many things besides those which address the intellect, that tend to keep us on the side of virtue; and though there be a cross of false blood in them, yet are they the adopted servitors of truth. Hopes and fears, and memories of suffering and delight, based, though they be, in fancy and mistake, go to make up that mingled mass of motive by which great principles of belief and action are lodged in the human character. The mere intelligence of various ages is perhaps the same, and their openness to logical evidence equal; but their susceptibility to hearty conviction, to that robust persuasion which fixes on the character, and transmutes the nature to its own likeness, is as different as the character of the times, and that is as various as the institutions of the age. Now, it is one thing to inform the mind and another to convince the man; one thing to prove and another to convert. The understanding may perceive an external result, without the sense rendering assent to the conclusion or taking it home to itself as among the vital entities of moral certainty. Bayle recognised, in geometry, the necessity of a certain result flowing from a

given promise, without yet admitting that result among the tried conclusions and new data of his mental being; he comprehended the proposition by his intellectual observation, without any impression on his spiritual consciousness; he saw but he did not believe. This difference between impassive mental perception and earnest moral conviction is alluded to by the Saviour where he says that seeing they shall not see.' How various is the persuasion of him who knows by reasoning that there is no danger in facing an assembly, from his who knows it by experience! The openness to logical influence depends merely on the natural intellect; but the mode in which conviction shall be impressed upon the heart, varies with the feelings, the personal experience, and the thousand accidental influ ences which have visited the individual. The mere mental acknowledgment of truth, especially of the truth of religion, is certainly insufficient; it is necessary to go on and leaven the character with it. To do this, different ages require different means; and what will operate in one century will be laughed at in the next, In one age, the ordeal-in another, the plague-in another, the wonders of science-in another, ghosts-these are the rude witnesses of truth, which strengthen belief, not by enlightening the intellect, but by acting on the moral consciousness. Beneath the current of all these varying impressions, stood the certainty of truth; each of them was transitory-if you will, false; but while they were the evidences of the truth to some, and the reminders of it to all, they were in no degree the foundation of it. They riveted popular faith, but were neither the cause nor the proof of the justness of that faith. And I find it a peculiar argument of Providence's being and appointment, that while revolving Time has exhibited in succession, phase after phase of man's mingled nature, it has never failed to bring upon the surface some quality by which it might be open to impressions leading to religion. When a chivalrous spirit was abroad in Europe, the times admitted of all its ardour being incorporated into Christian zeal; when in

the broad river of European thraldom, there started a strong eddy of intellectual independence, the position of things was such that it set in a direction to cleanse national faith in an age of learning, the church was especially learned; in eras of discovery, science has been found the peculiar guide of faith; in times of political feeling, popular passion has burned towards divine truth. The last was an age of metaphysics, and then, the nature and, construction of the mind were appealed to, as evidence of God. Without pushing this observation too far, would it be unfair to observe that all the experiences of all ages could not tend to this conclusion of religion, unless religion were true; that all the rays of light could not turn towards one point, unless that point were the centre? In objection to the admission of things not wholly true, among the evidences of religion, it may be said that if we find weakness in what supported the faith of other times, future ages may overthrow the foundation of ours; that the religion of the poet who was converted by a sound of thunder in clear weather, had in fact no apology at all. But the distinction which I have before alluded to will show us that these things are not the demonstration but the persuasion of a God, that they kindle devotion only because knowledge was there beforehand; that the mind saw before that there must be a God, and now felt that there was one."

"I am afraid that all the evidence of God will, if strictly examined, turn out to be but a suggester of him. Amidst the heap of remembrancers of deity, and the mass of cumulative probabilities of his existence, I have in vain looked for a clear and satisfactory proof of his being. It is a matter of little interest to me whether there be a God or not; for if I were persuaded of his reality, I would defy his power. Still, as a matter of speculative curiosity, we will, if you like, debate the question of his existence. First, then, God is a spirit;' spirit is a quality, and can, of course, have no independent being, and you can form no idea of it which is not more or less material; spirit, being immaterial,

cannot have locality, for position is the relation of one point to another, yet both residence and motion are the scriptural predictates of deity :-spirit cannot have passions, and so the logical framers of the articles declared that he was impartibilis, impassibilis;' yet anger, love, and jealousy are attributed to him→→ God is love ;' love is a feeling arising upon relation, and of course, he could not have loved before any thing was created, and yet he is unchangeable; he is described as tender and loving, and the misery of the world must make him miserable; if he is infinitely merciful, he must always pardon, and if infinitely just, never; and the Christian scheme does not reconcile the difficulty, because that Christ should die for sin, the innocent for the guilty, is not just."

"That God is impossible," said I, "is no proof that he is not true. Man's nature is an impossibility, and he is constantly described as inconsistent and self-contradictory. All those deviations from custom, which the course of nature is daily exhibiting, are impossibilities, yet facts."

66

Still," said Tyler, "what external evidence is there for the naked fact of his being? By the argument of natural theology, God is shown to be a satisfactory theory; but the circumstance that an hypothesis explains all phenomena, does not prove the truth of the hypothesis. In electricity, acoustics and light, there are two hypotheses which equally solve all difficulties, and clearly demonstrate that an hypothesis is not necessarily true. The negative argument from the same source is equally fallacious. It is said that so curious and splendid a world could not naturally exist, yet God is more curious and more splendid, and he naturally exists; it comes to that. It is as philosophical to believe that the world is self-existent, as that God is; the same argument that proves a creator of the world, proves a creator of God. The notion of a deity only shifts the difficulty."

"I will freely admit," said I," and I believe that every thinking believer will do the same, that the intellect can

shed no light upon the existence and character of God, and that the soul alone is capable of taking cognizance of his being. And this consideration will perhaps show how reasonable it is, when we follow intellect only, to expect such contradictions and difficulties as you have alluded to above. God may be viewed through a twofold medium; firstly, as the mechanical creator of the material world, and secondly, as a spiritual being, recognised only by those powers which are capable of apprehending and feeling spirit. In the former view, he manifests himself only as agent, and when he is sought through his works, it is as agent only that he is to be discovered; in the latter, he is scanned as a being by the spirit and soul of man, and in this manifestation, it is his qualities and essence that are sought and seen. Any suggestions drawn from reason, which oppugn the fact of his being are entitled to regard; but those arguments which you have derived from the knowledge of the external world, and urged against any mode of his being, are impertinent, for it is only through the consciousness of the soul that we know aught of his nature, and that consciousness reveals no contradictions. Intellect is the instrument by which the first inquiry is conducted, and we may accordingly conclude that though intellect may think of God as external operant, it has no eye to look upon his inward essence, for the hints it gathers from nature do not extend so far; the spirit permeates the inner world of spirit, and it only can tell aught of the nature of God."

"If intellect," said Tyler, "cannot prove the truth of religion, on what do you found your faith?"

"I am convinced of the truth of Christianity," said I, "by perceiving its accordance with the fundamental form and native spirit of the soul. It is the truth of our nature. It restores to order what was, confused, to symmetry what was irregular, to peace what was disturbed. Free from theory, it explains all phenomena; armed with no persuasives, it prevails with all who have heard it. Think of it, and it calms the sea of care; tell it, and it stills the storm of passion. How promi