Morals,again,says Ward,are as certain as mathematical intuitions;the truth that 'malice and mendacity are evil habits'is as necessary as the truth that 'all trilateral figures are triangular.'(237)Further,I 'intue'that 'all morally evil acts are prohibited by some living Personal Being';and from this axiom it follows,as an obvious inference,'that this Person is the supreme Legislator of the Universe.'(238)The obvious difficulty is that Ward proves too much.His argument is leading to an independent theism,not a theism reconcilable with an historical creed.Accordingly he has to limit or resist his own logic.He admits the uniformity of nature as 'generally true,'but makes two exceptions,in favour,first,of 'an indefinite frequency'of miracles,and secondly of the freedom of 'human volitions.'(239)The Freewill doctrine leads to an elaborate and dexterous display of dialectic,though he must be a very feeble determinist who could not translate Ward's arguments into his own language.Beyond this we have further difficulties.If the creed be as demonstrable as Euclid,how can anybody deny it?Ward has to account for the refusal of those who do not accept his intuitions by some moral defect;they are like blind men reasoning upon colours.Mill's 'antitheism'shows that he was guilty of 'grave sin';for,on the Catholic doctrine,there can be no 'invincible ignorance of the one true God.'(240)Many men,however,condemn the creed of revelation precisely upon the moral ground.The Utilitarians denounced the profound immorality of the doctrine of hell and of vicarious punishment.Ward's argument requires such a conscience as will recognise the morality of a system which to others seems radically immoral,The giver of the moral law is also the giver of the natural law.But it seems to be as hard to show that Nature is moral in this sense as to show that the moral legislator,if omnipotent,can also be benevolent.
The one great religious difficulty,as Ward allows,is the existence of evil.He quotes Newman's statement that it is a 'vision to dizzy and appal;and inflicts upon the mind a sense of a profound mystery,which is absolutely beyond human solution.'(241)Plainly,it comes to this:the 'intuitions'are in conflict with experience.They assert that the creator is omnipotent and infinitely just and benevolent.The admitted facts are incompatible with the theory,and are therefore declared to imply an 'insoluble mystery.'Ward intimates that he can show the true place of this difficulty after setting forth the 'impregnable basis on which Theism reposes.'But he does not appear to have found time for this ambitious enterprise.
This introduces the more special problem.How from your purely metaphysical position do you get to the historical position?What is the relation between the authority of the Church and the authority of the pure reason?Though Ward was perfectly satisfied with his own metaphysics,it was of course evident to him that such reasoning was altogether beyond the reach of the mass of mankind.If you are to prove your creed by putting people right about Freewill and the uniformity of nature,you will adjourn the solution till the day of judgment.An essential point of his whole argument is the utter incapacity of mankind at large to form any judgment upon such matters.The Protestant 'right of private judgment'means scepticism.
Everybody will have his own opinion if nobody trusts any one else.If the truth of Christianity is to be proved by the evidences after Paley's fashion,nobody has a right to believe who has not swallowed whole libraries and formed elaborate canons of criticism.The peasant who holds opinions about history,to say nothing of science and philosophy,must obviously take them on trust.Hence we must either give up the doctrine that 'certitude'is necessary,or we must find some proof accessible to the uneducated mind.But it is an essential point of Catholicism,if not of Christianity,that faith is necessary to salvation.If wrong belief be sinful,right belief must be attainable.But men by themselves are utterly impenetrable to right reason.We have,then,to combine scepticism as to the actual working of the human intellect with dogmatism as to the faith.How is that feat to be accomplished?
Ward replies,by the doctrine of 'implicit reasoning.'
