The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1879-07-04
Probability as a Guide.
W. E. Gladstone. in Nineteenth Century.


W. &. Gladstone, in Nineteenth Century.
1t is deeply-important question
whether, and how far, the law of probable
evidence governs the means by which pro-
vision has been made for our acceptance of
Christian doctrine. This is a great contro-
verted question of theology, which it could
not be advantageous to discuss in the light,
tranquil as it is, supplied by the philosophy
of Butler. 1t cannot now be attempted.
however well 1t may deserve separate ef-
fort. For the present, it only remains to
deal with question belonging to the re-
gion of ethics. For the doctrine of the
authority of probable evidence In practical
subject-matter is impugned NOT only by
those who require absolute certainty in lieu
of it, but likewise by those who permit and
warrant moral action against probability.
These are the teachers of what is called
the universal or compulsory doctrine Of th }
Roman fheologiaps. 1t has been combated
even by Gonzales, Jesuit, and General
Of the order It is confronted by a system
called probabiliorism, which teaches that,
when in doubt among several alternatives
Of conduct, We are bound to choose that
which has the greatest likelihood Of being
right. And there is also, it appears,a rigid
school Of those who pass by the name OF
tutiorsts. These hold that even such like
iihnod is insufficient, and that certainty is
r =.
required as warrant for our acts. But
the popular doctrine seems to be that OF
prohabilsm. 1t would be wrong to assert
that it is a doctrine consciously held and
taught for purposes adverse to morality or
honor. Without venting any such calumny,
let us regard it purely in the abstract, and
not as having become parasiticallto par
ticular Church. For my own part know
not how, when it is SO contemplated, to
escape from the impression that when
closely scrutinized it will be found to
threaten the very first principles of morals,
or to deny that, if universally received and
applied, IL would GO far to destroy what
ever there is of substance in moral obllga-
tion. The essence of the doctrine is the
license to choose the less probable. LIS 1t
not. then, obvious in the first place that it
overthrows the whole authority of probable
evidence? No probabilist, it must be sup
posed, could adopt and urge the argument
Of Bishop Buffers Analogy" for tbs
truth of Revelation, for his opponent would
Al once reply by the plea that there ara
certain real and unsolved difficulties about
the theory of religion that these constitu
ted q solid, even if an inferior, probability
| and that he could not, on the principles o
nrnbabiligm. be blamed for vindicating tn
r;0ht OF his natural freedom in following
lthe negative. If the view here taken
1.-the range and title of probable evidence 2
i correct. it is fearful to think what must .
4 the ultimate effects upon human knoWieoge
belief. and action of any doctrine whlc
saps or oyerthrows its title to our obedlence
r saw the ultimate effects, for. when though
moves only within prescribed limits, 2 ion
ltime may elapse before the detail 81 PR
lcess is evolved, and 1t Is the ultimate g
feet, in moral questions, which y tne tru
effect. 1t would even seem as It any Wn
s ara. consciously or unconsciously, impal
ling the authority OF probable evidence
must also be clearing tho ground for 70
fall swoop OF funbelief in its descent npo
the earth. Next, we are surely justsfied
! Ibeinr 70 the last degree suspicious Of = 90
trine which sets up the liberty Of man
being not only condition Of all right NOR
] | Indictment, but q. positive ingredient n y
claim of one alternative 70 be preierrs
over another an element of such conside
alton As to give tho preponderance 70 wn
vonla otherwise Be che lighter seal
!. T,ntv il thar which binds. Surely, # The
"a one idea more pointedly expressive e:
another of she character Of the ethical teac
IN uf Christianity Il these is one less
more poiDtedly deTlvable than anoth
! from he contemplation Of its model in q
le Blessed Lord, it is the idea and the less
that ws are to deny the claim Of me
human viii to be 4 serious ground of MOI
: action, aud tercguce il ID its proper fun
tion.shat Of uniting itself with the will
God. This fnnction i one Of subordin
tion-one which, maaifsstly, il never q
perform 50 long IS e II - be recognised
somsthine entitIed 10 epeiste II detersni
iii ,nofal Shs.lss. sid yet xtfinsic md I I
ditiara III, ana thafefpTs sapefaAs fko
IA Sn