IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET {MT-3) 
 
 // 
 
 ^ 
 
 .<^*. 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 
 I.I 
 
 lU 
 
 u 
 
 L£ 12.0 
 
 1.25 
 
 1.8 
 
 U III 1.6 
 
 Vi 
 
 VQ 
 
 ^;. 
 
 4VV 
 
 y 
 
 /A 
 
 'W 
 
 €4 
 
 4^ 
 
 
 
 ;\ 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 1980 
 
Technical Notes / Notes techniques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Physical 
 features of this copy which may alter any of the 
 Images in the reproduction are checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exempiaire 
 qu'll lui a 6tA possible de se procurer. Certains 
 difauts susceptibies de nuire A la quality de la 
 reproduction sont not6s ci-dessous. 
 
 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couvertures de couleur 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes giographiques en couleur 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d^coiordes, tacheties ou piqu6es 
 
 Tight binriing (may cause Shadows or 
 distortion along interior margin)/ 
 Reiiure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou 
 de la distortion le long de la marge 
 intirieure) 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured plates/ 
 Planches en couleur 
 
 r^ Show through/ 
 
 Transparence 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 m 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires 
 
 Front cover damaged. 
 
 Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibiiographiques 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 n 
 
 Pagination incorrect/ 
 Erreurs de pagination 
 
 Pages missing/ 
 Des pages manquont 
 
 D 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 D 
 
 Maps missing/ 
 
 Des cartes gdographiques manquent 
 
 D 
 
 Plates missing/ 
 
 Des planches manquec>.t 
 
 n 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires 
 
The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t4 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition at 
 de la nettet6 de rexemplaire film6. et en 
 conformit6 avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall 
 contain the symbol —^> (meaning CONTINUED"), 
 or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever 
 applies. 
 
 Un das symboles suivants apparaftra sur la der- 
 nlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: 
 le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols 
 V signifie "FIN". 
 
 The original copy was borrowed from, and 
 filmed with, the kind consent of the following 
 institution: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grftce d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de I'dtablissement prdteur 
 suivant : 
 
 BibliothAque nationale du Canada 
 
 Maps or plates too large to be entirely included 
 in one exposure are filmed beginning in the 
 upper left hand corner, left to right and top to 
 bottom, as many frames as required. The 
 following diagrams illustrate the method: 
 
 Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre 
 reproduites en un seul cliche sont filmdes d 
 partir de I'angle sup^rieure gauche, de gauche i 
 droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Le diagramme suivant 
 illustre la mdthode : 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
'W(»r 
 
 
 
 \. 
 
 A LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 Archbishop Lynch 
 
 ■ * 
 
 ■^^Sr- 
 
ttl 
 
 
/ -^ — 
 
 \ ' A CRITIQUE 
 
 <Mf 
 
 CARDINAL NEWMAN'S 
 
 ExposilioD of tbo Illative 
 
 EMBODIED IN 
 
 A LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 ARCHBISHOP LYNCH 
 
 BY 
 
 T Arnold Haultain M A 
 
 TORONTO 
 WILLIAMSON & CO 
 
 SucoesBors to Willing & WilliamHoa 
 1885 
 
To the Most Reverend 
 
 JOHN JOSEPH LYNCH, D.D., 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF TORONTO, PRBr.ATB ASSiaTANT OF THE PONTIFICAL THUmNk, 
 
 Your (iHA( k: 
 
 You liave m often, both by published writing and pulpit 
 \itterance, taken upon yourself the defence of the denomination 
 in which you hold so exalted a position, that 1 venture to address 
 to you a letter embodying a criticism of a doctrine promulgat^'d 
 by one of the most eminent of the Cardinals of that denomhia- 
 t!on. The doctrine to which I refer is that of the possibility of 
 attaining to certitude by means of an illative sense. I shall 
 proceed without further delay to place l>efore you my reasons 
 for not believing in such possibility. 
 
„ 
 
 / 
 

 IfioX yap Soffci, & ^utKpartK, ircp2 rSiv roiovrav ttna^ wnrtp mii croi ri 
 
 /itv tragic ciSci'ai iv t^ vvv )3u() y dSiVoTOV elvat ^ frayVMAcfrdv tj.— ^N^ 
 
 Plato, Fhado, 83, c. / 
 
 i 
 
 IT is now more than thirteen years since the first 
 publication of Mr, Froude's criticism of Cardinal 
 Newman's Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent. 
 During this time religious discussion has been so rife 
 that we may unhesitatingly say that it has formed an 
 essential feature of the greater part of our heavier 
 periodical literature. I need not, then, I think, hesi- 
 tate to call your attention to a portion of this famous 
 work — and that an exceedingly important portion — 
 which Mr. Froude has left altogether untouched. Es- 
 pecially too, as it is the boast of the Church of which 
 the author of that work is so illustrious a representa- 
 tive, and of which, so far at all events as England and 
 Ireland are concerned, he is so deservedly revered a 
 spokesman, that it is her system that supereminently 
 stands confronting the attacks of those agnostic 
 theories which one of her latest defenders sums up in 
 the word "Naturalism." '''It is her glory," writes 
 this brilliant apologist, ** that among the multitudinous 
 religions of men, she is specially singled out by the 
 anti-Christian movement as its irreconcilable foe." 
 *' The Catholic Church is in "^e forefront of the 
 battle." <" 
 
 It will be generally conceded that, of all the reli- 
 gions which profess to exhibit a rational and coherent 
 exposition of the 'origin and end of man, and which de- 
 clare that either certain unique and unalterable depositay 
 or certain infallible formularies, contain this exposition, 
 
 I. W. S. Lilly. "The Religious Future of the World."- Contemporary Review^ 
 Fehruary, 1883. 
 
• 6 
 
 the Boman Catholio Church has most coDspioaously 
 sacoeeded in moulding herself to the varying progres- 
 sion and retrocession of human sagacity, and the vicis- 
 situdes of popular sympathy or distrust. It is in this 
 supreme endeavour to conform to the spirit of the 
 
 age, that there is likely to lurk the most serious 
 source of error. To glance at one of the most fluctu- 
 ating of religious questions : that of the province of 
 reason in the attainment of theological truths, we 
 shall find that she has invariably adjusted her posi- 
 tion to the force of extraneous opposition or support. 
 And at the present day, more, perhaps, than ever 
 before, seeing that reason in all extra-religious matters 
 holds a position inexpugnable, and evinces an ever- 
 encroaching power, she is wont to descend somewhat 
 from the stand she has occasionally taken, and to 
 allow, with certain reservations, its claim to be the 
 touchstone of human knowledge. 
 
 In harmony, apparently, with this tendency, Cardi- 
 nal Newman, striving to bring certain religious princi- 
 ples within the grasp of those who deny the possibil- 
 ity of a supernatural perception of the reality of 
 Christianity, and recognizing the fruitlessness of 
 attempting to prove that the reasoning powers alone 
 can obtaia for us that absolute assurance which, in 
 matters eternal, all seek, falls back upon the illative 
 sense. It is in this, and that an exceedingly momen- 
 tous, doctrine of the Cardinal's, that I hope to show 
 there lies concealed a grave and radical defect. 
 
 That this attainment of certitude is the office as- 
 signed to the illative sense as explained in chapter ix. 
 of the work mentioned, the following quotations will 
 prove : — " In any inquiry about things in the concrete 
 
men differ from eaoh other, not so much in the sonnd- 
 ness of their reasoning as in the principles which 
 govern its exercise, . . . those principles are of 
 a personal character, . . . where there is no com- 
 mon measure of minds, there is no common measure 
 of arguments, and . . . the validity of proof is 
 determined, not by any scientific test, but by the 
 illative sense.'**"' •* I follow him [Amort] in holding, 
 that ... we are not justified, in the case of con- 
 crete reasoning, and especially of religious inquiry, in 
 waiting till . . logical demonstration is ours, but 
 on the contrary are bound in conscience to seek truth 
 and to look for certainty by modes of proof, which, 
 when reduced to the shape of formal propositions, 
 fail to satisfy the severe requisitions of science."*^' 
 What, then, is this illative sense ? It is a ^' mental 
 faculty " to which " is committed " " the sole and 
 final judgment on the validity of an inference in con- 
 crete matter."**' Not the process of reasoning, but the 
 ** regulating principle of all reasoning ; " '< concerned 
 with the soundness of the reasoning."''' " Any inves- 
 tigation whatever . . , will sufl&ce to show how 
 impossible it is to apply the cumbrous apparatus of 
 verbal reasoning to its continuous necessities, and how 
 imperative it is to fall back upon that native good 
 sense (that is, the action of our illative judgment upon 
 our personal view of things) which legitimately trusts 
 itself because there is nothing else given it to trust."*®' 
 *^ It determines what science cannot determine,[<tbe 
 limit of converging probabilities, and the reasons 
 sufficient for a proof."^'' These are the most definite 
 
 2. Ofi cit , Part II. Cb. X S a. 5- ^b. ix § 3. 
 
 3. I&id. 6. Cb. ix § a. 
 
 4. Cb. ix. 7. /Aid. 
 
ufcfceraaoes that oan be culled from the explanation of 
 the subject ; bat they are not more vague than is the 
 object of such explanation itself shadowy and intangi- 
 ble, and as such I intend to treat it. 
 
 I. Anyone, hearing of an apparition, would consider 
 that there was, prima faciey evidence against the fact 
 of its objective existence, because it is contrary to 
 all recognized notions of the law of the uniformity of 
 nature ; in other words, the probabilities are in favour 
 of believing, that all so-called spectral phenonema 
 can be explained away on a purely natural foundation. 
 
 I£. If, mdeed, the unearthly visitor can be person- 
 ally examined, and can show credentials intelligible to 
 mundane minds of its supernal, infernal, or merely 
 immaterial source, we need go no farther. 
 
 III. But if all its actions can be shown to be nob 
 without the sphere of an ordinary mortal, a strong 
 chain of condemnatory evidence is forthcoming. 
 
 lY. If the particular individual who personated the 
 ghost can be discovered, all doubt is at an end. 
 
 Let us apply thia to Cardinal Newman^s illative 
 sense. 
 
 I. Seeing that " certitude does not admit of an in- 
 terior immediate test, sufficient to discriminate it 
 from false certitude ; "^** that, " for genuine proof iu 
 concrete matter we require an organon more delicate, 
 versatile, and elastic than verbal argumentation ; "^^^ 
 that "inference, considered in the shape of verbal 
 argumentation, determines neither our principles, nor 
 our ultimate judgments, — that it is neither the teat 
 
 & Ch. vii. §a. 
 
 9. Ch. viii. ii. 
 
9 
 
 of truth nor the adequate basis of assent ; "^''^ His 
 Eminence has recourse to an '* unscientific reasoning," 
 which '''has a higher source than logical rule," which 
 is born, not made, ^"^ analogous to phronesis in mat- 
 ters of coDduct, to taste in the fine, and to skill in 
 the economic, arts. ^"^ Beguiled by the extreme 
 subtlety of the processes of the mind, he must assert 
 the existence of an unknown and undemonstrablo 
 entity as the source of such phenonema. That is to 
 say, believing himself to possess, "^nd believing that 
 all can possess, an assurance which, he perceives, ia 
 not the product of the ordinarily classified intellec- 
 tual powers,, he conceives of a power superior to all 
 these powers i not that of reasoning, but one that su- 
 persedes and controla reason ; not the process of draw- 
 ing conclusions, but an authority that dictates whe- 
 ther or not conclusions shall be accepted; not any- 
 thing that entered into the universally preconceived 
 conceptions of the laws of mind, but a separate, dis- 
 tinct, and auxiliary faculty. On the face of it, this: 
 theory is highly suspicious, and, as such, should be 
 subjected to the severest scrutiny. 
 
 II. Let us, however, granting, despite its unfavour- 
 ablo aspect, the reality of this spectral sense, examine 
 its credentials. There are three different points of 
 view from which it may be considered: — 
 
 A. Can the " higher source " signify a divine source ? 
 Are we to understand, that, in the exercise of the mind 
 in the search for religious truth, the natural faculties. 
 are aided by a Spiritual illumination, a specific and 
 divinely-granted adjunct to a weak and faltering 
 
 Ko. Hid, II Ch. viii. %^. I2. Ch. ix. ^z. 
 
10 
 
 reason ? No ; this, a view perfectly legitimate, and con- 
 taining in it no inconsistencies if certain not rare pre. 
 mises are pcaited, cannot be the interpretation of Car- 
 dinal Newman's position. Were it so, he could not 
 possibly have omitted somewhere to have so categori- 
 cally asserted. And yet we find that he strenuously 
 avoids the application of even the epithet " moral " to 
 the certitude springing from the utilisation of this 
 sense, and oaly once, after much hesitation, does he so 
 make use of it. Perfectly easily too, might wo have 
 so construed his elucidation, had he given us the slight- 
 est encouragement. For it is not, as far as I know, a 
 doctrine alien to the church he has joined. The fol- 
 lowing sentences from one who has, I believe, gone 
 through a very similar process of thought, culminating, 
 in like manner, in a secession from Anglo- to Boman- 
 Catholicism, seems to imply a belief that some such 
 coalition exists : — " We do not assent, then, to these 
 dogmatic truths of revelation, whatever they may be, 
 because we see them — because they are evident . . , 
 it would be forced assent . . . and all merit would 
 consequently cease." ''* God's grace is ever invisibly 
 working with us on our journey towards faith." ^^'^ 
 Doubtless the learned Cardinal — to whom indeed the 
 last-mentioned author dedicates the volume quoted 
 from — holds a like view ; indeed he himself thus 
 writes : ^' It must be recollected that theological rea- 
 soning professes to be sustained by a more than human 
 power, and be guaranteed by a more than human au- 
 thority." '^** But certain it is, that the illative sense 
 is not the explanation of the workings of such power, 
 
 13. Sermons by Fathers of the Society of Jam Vol. i<. by Rev. T< Haider, S. J. 
 Sermon y. 
 
 14. Op.tit.Q.\x, ix.83. 
 
11 
 
 nor the evidences of such guarantee. But, after all, 
 were this the true explanation, the possession of such 
 certitude would be vMlueless, for — the owner being 
 powerless to transfer so superhumanly implanted, and 
 so purely subjective, a gift — the certitude becomes as 
 useless to others as the water of crystallization in a 
 Sahara rock to a parched Aiab, or the latent heat of an 
 ice-floe to a freezing Lap. 
 
 B. From certain expressions used with reference to 
 the nature of this illative sense — expressions such as a 
 ** present imagination " which " reaches to conclusions 
 above and beyond" " methodical processes of infer- 
 ence; " ^^"^ a " natural, uncultivated faculty, sometimes 
 approaching to a gift ; " ^^^^ a ** native good sense ; " ^"^ 
 a ** personal gift ; " <^^^ or "habit ; " ^^^^ etc.y we might 
 very pardonably conjecture that this sense was a sort 
 of logical clairvoyance, which overleapt the bounds 
 of ordinary reasoning, and was only saved from the 
 epithet of irrational by the fact that its exploits were 
 utterly inconceivable. True, we do sometimes appear 
 to avail ourselves of an indefinable power of choice. 
 
 " It lies not in our power to love or hate, 
 For will in us is over-ruled by fate, 
 When two are stript, long ere the course begin, 
 We wish that one should lose, the other win ; 
 And one especially do we affect 
 Of two gold ingots, like in each respect. 
 The reason no man knows ; let it suffice. 
 What we behold is censured by our eyes."(20) 
 
 But if I may be allowed the saying ridentem dicere 
 
 verum quid vetat ? I can compare such lawless per 
 
 saltum conclusion to nothing better than to the trick 
 
 of projecting a coin into the air to determine which of 
 
 15. Cb. viii. § a. 18. Ch. vii'« §3. 
 
 16 Ch. viii. § 3 19. Ch. viii. § 2. 
 
 17. Cb. ix. §3 20. Hero and Leander, Marlowe, ist Seitiad. 
 
II 
 
 two courses shall be adopted when the recommeBda- 
 tions of each seem in equipoise, and therefore unfit; to 
 take upon itself the high duties imposed by the Cardi- 
 nal on his illative sense. 
 
 C. A cursory and uncritical examination of the 
 nature of tbis sense, might lead one to suppose that it 
 is identical il its operation with that to which logi- 
 cians have given the name * anticipation ' — the faculty, 
 which, bj a glorious guess as it were, seizes a truth 
 prior to the proper perception of its proofs. Such was 
 Newton's law, which saw in the revolutions of the 
 planets, the action of the same force that governs a 
 falling apple. Such too, probably, was Darwin's grand 
 generalization explaining the origin of species in the 
 animal kingdom. That this, however, is by no means 
 the pro"vince of the illative sense, the following brief 
 comparison will establish : — 
 
 a Anticipation is an attempt to discover hidden 
 causes ; the illative sense determines which of several 
 causes already found shall be accepted. 
 
 h Anticipation is verified by subsequent ordinary 
 proofs ; the illative sense over-rides, and is not amen* 
 able to, ordinary proofs. 
 
 c Anticipation, per gey is not trustworthy ; trust- 
 worthiness is the peculiar property of the illative sense, 
 
 \ 
 
 There ought, properly, next to be considered tbe 
 
 analogies stated to exist between the illative sense and 
 phronesiSf taste, and skill. I am not, however, at all 
 desirous of discovering any discrepancies in such analo- 
 gies, in as much as this will depend upon the general 
 outline of my line of argument. But when we read on 
 
 the one h&nd ot phronesis, that it is " the faculty which 
 
18 
 
 guides the mind in matters of conduct ; " that it is 
 ''the directing, controlling, and determining principle 
 in such matters ; " that it is ** seated in ^he mind of 
 the individual, who is thus his own law, his own 
 teacher, and his own judge in those special cases of 
 duty which are personal to him ;"^^' and when we road 
 on the other hand of conscience, that it ''is not a 
 judgment upon any speculative truth, any abstract 
 doctrine, but bears immediately on conduct, on some- 
 thing to be done or not done ;" that it is " the practi- 
 cal judgment or dictate o^ reason, by which we judge 
 what liic et nunc is to be done as being good, or to be 
 avoided as evil;" ^'^'^ we are very forcibly struck with 
 the identity of conscience andphronesis. But of con- 
 science we are told that it " is a messenger from Him, 
 who . . . speaks to us behind a veil ... is 
 the aboriginal Vicar of Christ;" " the voice of con- 
 science is the Divine Authority." ^^'^ So that if — as 
 appears — conscience SLudphronesis are one and the same 
 thing, may we not justly ask if it is ri^ht to draw an 
 analogy between the illative sense and this one thing 
 by whatever name we call it ? Does not the divine 
 nature of this mentor nullify its comparison to any 
 purely natural power ? 
 
 On the subject of taste, indeed, it is impossible so 
 definitively to maintain the existence of any discre- 
 pancy, because, unfortunately, despite the extreme 
 variety of the views that have been urged as regards 
 taste, the learned prelate has omitted to vouchsafe to 
 us any clue by which to discover the peculiar signifi- 
 
 21 Op cit. Ch. IX. § 2. 
 
 22. Dr. John Henry Newman's Reply to Mr. Gladstones Pamphlet, § 5. 
 
 23. Ibid, — I have of coursfl. as Your Grace will notice, been careful to quote 
 ftom Cardinal Newmao himself throughout this argument. 
 
 J. 
 
14. 
 
 cation he himself attaches to the term. There is, in- 
 deed, one extremely high authority on this subject to 
 whom His Eminence might have appealed as seeming 
 to substantiate the aptness of the analogy between 
 taste and the illative sense. Mr, Ruskin thus writes : 
 ** The differences in the accuracy of the lines of the 
 Torso of the Vatican . , . iiory those in one of 
 M. Angelo's finest works, . . . restb on points of 
 such traceless and refined delicacy, that, though we 
 feel them in the result, we cannot follow them in the 
 details. . . . But suppose that the best sculptor 
 in the world, possessing the most entire appreciation 
 of the excellence of the Torso, were to sit down, pen 
 in hand, to try and tell us wherein the peculiar truth 
 of each line consisted. Could any words that he could 
 use make us feel the hairbreadth of depth and distance 
 on which all depends ?" Yet to me it seems that 
 there is this ineradicable distinction between taste in 
 the fine arts and the illative sense, which completely 
 extirpates the seeming appositeness of the analogy. 
 Although the mind may not always be able distinctly 
 to state the grounds of the superiority of any one piece 
 of sculpture, architecture, painting, or music to another, 
 the educated eye or ear gan. One important element 
 of good taste is a keen and appreciative organ of 
 sense. With purely mental processes the case is dif- 
 ferent ; there is here nothing but a mind to think and 
 judgments to be weighed. In the one case, superadded 
 to all that appeals to the intellect, the object of con- 
 templation contains form, colour, or sound ; in the 
 other case, the object of contemplation contains only 
 a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. 
 So with skill ; one of its chief factors is a high develop- 
 
w 
 
 ment of a purely physiological operation, viz., the oo- 
 ordiuatioD of muscular movement. 
 
 If we grant this, then, we cannot allow that any 
 analogies can he drawn betv/een such dissimilar pro- 
 oesRGS as those of the illative sense tind taste and skill. 
 
 I may not, perhaps, have been as explicit in this 
 part of my criticism as I could wish jO have heen 
 What I am trying to show is that, if indeed by these 
 analogies His Eminence wishes to teach us nothing 
 more than the fact that, just as taste and skill are, to a 
 certain extent, natural gifts, so there are men who 
 excel :n argumentative ability, my strictures will not, 
 of course, lie. But if he means that, just as a good 
 ear can detect a false note, and a good eye will ap- 
 preciate a beautiful combination of form and colour, 
 so there is a faculty in the mind that intuitively grasps 
 truth and eschews error, then I cannot but maintain 
 that no such analogy exists. But for the proof of this, 
 as I have remarked, I must rely upon my general line 
 of argument. . . 
 
 III. We are forced, then, to the conclusion that the 
 credentials of this shadowy sense are spurious ; we 
 shall further find that all its actions are explicable on 
 other and well-known grounds. 
 
 We are told that it is an '^extra-logical" faculty, 
 a faculty superior to the ''apparatus of verbal reason- 
 ing." But what are we to understand by this decrial 
 of " verbal reasoning ?" I fail to appreciate the de- 
 precation of this reasoniug, until it is shown to be 
 other than that which the mind spontaneously per- 
 forms reduced to scientific forms. And this the Cardi- 1 
 
16 
 
 nal omits to do. The science of logic is not a mere 
 empty phantasm of the brain, but a methodical arrange- 
 ment of the way in which the mind thinks ; not — to 
 explain it by analogy — a " Siren " which, by the turning 
 of a handle, is made to imitate certain sounds, but the 
 science of akoustics, which explains what sound is fmd 
 how produced. To say that logic does not exhibit 
 the whole process by which a conclusion is reached is 
 scarcely correct ; **the laws of thought themselves are 
 few in number, and lie, in examples of perpetual 
 occurrence, under every thinking man*s observation."''"^ 
 That the majority of mankind draw conclusions by 
 processes which they are unable to put down in black 
 and whito, docs not vitiate the theory. M. Jourdain 
 was astonished to learn that he talked prose. If, how- 
 ever, it is His Eminence's opinion that logic is want- 
 ing in this direction — that it fails to cover the range 
 usually attributed to it, he might have treated us to 
 an excursus to that effect. At the very least, he ought 
 explicitly to have shown why it is that in simple 
 trains of thought, common logic is amply sufficient, 
 while, in complex ones, it entirely breaks down. 
 That it is " cumbrous" does not prove it invalid 
 But to say that it is in concrete cases that the office 
 of the illative sense lies ; in long and complex dis- 
 cussions ; when the ordinary method of reasoning 
 would be cumbrous ; when there are many converg- 
 ing probabilities, are suspicious phrases. When an 
 artery is lost to sight in its capillaries, the dissector 
 does not immediately promulgate a new theory of the 
 circulatory system. And surely the most abstract 
 
 24. An Ouilint of the Nece^ary Laws of Thought Abp. ThanabOD, lutro . \ 4. 
 
17 
 
 theory is built upon, and contains nothing foreign to, 
 concrete facts. 
 
 But the simplest way of showing that all the func- 
 tions of the illative sense are performed by this 
 maligned logic, is to take the Cardinal's own example 
 of its exercise. Speaking of the various contra- 
 
 dictions that exist amongst the different historians of 
 the pre-historic period of G' ece and Rome, " We see," 
 he remarks, "how a controversy ... is carried 
 on from starting points, and with collateral aids, not 
 formally proved, but more or less assumed, the process 
 of assumption lying in the action of the Illative sense, 
 applied to primary elements of thought respectively 
 congenial to the disputants." And he adds, " Should 
 it be objected, apropos of this particular case, that 
 the instinctive reasoning on which I have been 
 dwehing, is not worth much, since it has not brought 
 the disputants into agreement, I answer that I profess 
 to be stating facts, not devising an optimism." 
 ** Moreover," he says, ** it must be recollected, that 
 the controversy is still in its beginnings ; and there 
 is no reason for deciding that it will not lead in the 
 event to a unanimous conclusion of some kind, that 
 is, either to an assent to one particular view of the 
 history as the true one, or else to a conviction that 
 no true view is attainable." <^' That is to say, a 
 juster estimate, and one on which more reliance may 
 be placed, of this portion of history will accrue, if 
 all the disputants but one merge their illative senses 
 in deference to the illative sense of that one ; or, better 
 still, when, without exception, they eliminate their 
 
 25, op. cit. Ch. ix. § 3. 
 
IB 
 
 illative senses altoG^etber, and rely sultjly upon *' the 
 existing data for proof." Its value varies inversely as 
 its employment, and the more nearly its exercise ap- 
 proaches zero^ the nearer shall we be to l^he attainment 
 of truth ; or, if truth is beyond our reach, the more 
 certain shall we be that it is so. If it is urged that it 
 is the accumulation of fresh facts that places the 
 illative sense in abeyance, I answer that no one will 
 hesitate to accede to the proposition that the accumu- 
 lation of fresh facts is the surest road to an indisputa- 
 ble conclusion, and, therefore, tho greater the abeyance 
 the better. At all events, who shall decide at what 
 point we shall cease to collect facts and rely on the 
 illative sense? 
 
 Again, as the Cardinal himself suggests, we may 
 very properly urge that it is worth absolutely nothing, 
 when we see its employment resulting in such con- 
 trarieties of opinion. What difference, for example, 
 can we discover between the "high path of divination" 
 by which we are told ** Niebuhr does consciously pro- 
 ceed," ''^^ (which is given as a sample of that ** colla- 
 teral aid, not formally proved but more or less assumed, 
 the process of assumption lying in the action of the 
 illative sense,") and the ^' part de divination et de 
 conjecture,^' which Renan thinks " doit Hre permise " 
 in a criticism of the Gospels ? ^^^ And if they are one 
 and the same thing, and this identical with the faculty 
 upon which our author relies, and we find it demolish- 
 ing in one case all that it has built up in the other, 
 who will, after such evidence, trust himself to so in- 
 constant and ineflBcient a branch of the architectonic 
 
 26. Of. cit. Ch. ix. § 3. 
 
 27. VieJt fisusy p. 55. Paris: 1867, 
 
1» 
 
 faculty ? And the Cardinal himself tells us that he 
 arrived once at a wrong conclusion — not because he 
 did not use his illative sense, but because his illative 
 sense acted ** on mistaken elements of thought."^'"' So 
 that it appears we had better be quite sure of our 
 " elements of thought," whatever they may be, before 
 utilising our illative senses. 
 
 IV. We find, then, (1) that since the illative sense, 
 avowedly transcends logical processes, the assertion of 
 its existence may legitimately be deemed obnoxious 
 to discredit ; (2) tliat, since it is not a divine illumina- 
 tion, nor a logical second-sight, nor anticipation, it 
 fails to vindicate the exalted position allotted to it ; 
 (3) that, when all the functions assigned to it are rele- 
 gated to ordinary methods of ratiocination, with a 
 greater amount of confidence may the ultimate conclu- 
 sion be accepted. Nevertheless, as with all ghostly 
 phenomena, even after their rational explanation, there 
 remains in the mind an impression that such negative 
 evidence is, after all, unsatisfactory, it is necessary 
 for the perfect clearing up of the mystery, to seize, 
 and personally to interrogate, the individual, who, we 
 conclude, must have simulated its actions. 
 
 " Men's opinions, accordingly, on what is laudable 
 or blameable" (I quote from the Essay on Liberty f) 
 " are affected by all the multifarious causes which 
 influence their wishes in regard to the conduct of 
 others, and which are as numerous as those which 
 determine their wishes on any other subject. Some- 
 times their reason — at other times their prejudices or 
 superstitions : often their sS^l affections, not sel- 
 
 28. (7/ a/- Cb. U. I 3. (4), 
 
X 20 
 
 dom their antisocial ones, their envy or jealousy, their 
 arrogaDce dr oontemptuousness : but most commonly, 
 their desires or fears for themjielves — their legitimate 
 or illegitimate self-interest."'"' So, too, is it with men's 
 opinions on what is true or false. Not even were 
 we able to unify this multifariousness, and to define 
 exactly what it is that leads men to accept and re- 
 tain with the utmost obstinacy, any one position in 
 defianoe of the claims of all others, and which, in 
 ordinary language, goes by the phrase of ** being 
 certain," but which very commonly means being led 
 by natural propensity or prejudication, not even then, ' 
 couid we call the object of such definition the ** illa- 
 tive sense." But, indeed, it is absurd so to at- 
 tempt to unify such intricate influences. Even when 
 we have to the best of our ability banished 
 prejudice, — to the best of our ability, for is it 
 possible ever entirely to do so, except perhaps 
 in the matter of some abstract or wholly 
 impersonal science ? — and acted upon, as far 
 as we see, purely rational grounds, our opinions are de- 
 termined, not, surely, by an illative sense, but by the 
 combined effect of all those impressions which previous 
 observation and reflection have left upon the mind, 
 the several links of which, though so entangled by 
 oblivion that no power can exhibit their natural 
 sequence, yet retain, despite perchance some little rust, 
 an invincible force. And the certitude that results does 
 not fulfil the duties of the Keverend, Doctor's illative 
 sense ; such influences merely bring about that sort of 
 assurance which suffices for common things and every- 
 
 ag. On Liberty. John Stuart Mill. Ch. I. 
 
21 
 
 day life, and whether they lead to assents that are 
 genuine or aasentb that are not genuine, there is no- 
 iihing hy vhieh to discover. 
 ., Whf^ti iGardinal Newman attempts to dc ia' td^iohase 
 beyond th^.ppnfines of the- ^erra firma of logic, a 'btight 
 findi attractive light that shall illuminate all the 
 mysteriousness of the terra.: incognita beydnd the 
 senses. But is it not an ignis fatuut ? He tells us it 
 leads to certitude, and he tells us that '* it is the char- 
 acteristic of certitude that its object is a truth," <^> 
 but he forgets that " truth is one and eterual," ^^^^ 
 and that so-called ''* truths" ere mere links in a chain, 
 the ends of which are invisible to the human intellect ; 
 no li^ak of which can possibly be grasped or compre- 
 hended independently of its relation to all the rest. 
 
 And this i6 beyond us.' Glimpses are all we get. 
 Knowledge is a stream. No stream ever flows, or can 
 ^ow, entirely round any point. We must in this life 
 ^remain satisfied With a limited, one-sided view. Ahd 
 a limited, one-sid«d view never results in certitude. 
 It is this partial view that Cardinal Newman strives 
 to surmount. But in this attempt he soars above that 
 stream only to a region whose vapours cloud a land- 
 scape already not too clear. 
 
 In this experiment: in thus trying to point out to 
 us lipw we may attain to a certitude suited to the 
 eternalness of things divine — indefectible and un- 
 changing, he has fou^d himself on what to-day is the 
 great campus philosophorum. Rejecting, apparently, 
 the extreme view of the bolder doctrine, that to those 
 who, in seeking eterual truth, are ** pure in heart," 
 
 30. Oji. cit. Ch. vii. §2. 
 
 31. Institutes of Law. Lurimer. Bk. I., cb. xii., § c. 
 
shall be given a power to **see God;*' '3») and reject-^ 
 ing, I presume, the theory of the impossibility of 
 obtaining positive knowledge of the hypo-phenomenal, 
 the absolute, His Eminence essays a compromise by 
 trying to prove that the mind itself contains that by 
 which it can transcend itself. " = 
 
 32. S. Matthew.ch. V. V 8. 
 
 These, your Grace, are my arguments for disbeliev- 
 ing in the existence of an illative sense. You may 
 ask : ** How do they concern me ?" Thus : If these 
 arguments be valid, one of the corner stones of your 
 church, erected by one of its greatest supporters, 
 crumbles away. You, as the head of this archbishopric, 
 may reasonably be expected to attempt their refuta- 
 tion. .,-[:-.' :■: .■;;: <'^.', ■: .' 
 
 . , I have the honour to be 
 
 > , ' ■ ' ■■:■(-■'• , ■ - . -i". . 
 
 ,■ ■ "■ ■ - , ' i' ■ I'lf.. ' i i' ■ i '.'"■' '/ ' : ' ,, - r /'",,■..• '■ 
 
 * , Your Grace's humble servant, ., 
 
 ■■"'"''■'"■''•;'■"■'■, ' ' "■ "' "'v ■'/'■ The Author. 
 University College, Toronto, Canada. : '