88 THE LIGHT OF DAT 



called evidence that man continues to live after the 

 dissolution of his body. Yet Dr. Abbott is con- 

 vinced that he does so exist ; he realizes in himself 

 " a nature superior to disease, decay, mortality ; " 

 and who shall gainsay him ? who shall say he is 

 illogical ? The evidence he has upon this point is 

 personal and subjective, and cannot be imparted to 

 another. It has no logical or scientific validity, be- 

 cause it begins and ends with himself. It is not a 

 question of reason, but of religious conviction. But 

 all the questions in dispute between Professor Hux- 

 ley and Dr. Wace are questions of reason and' of 

 evidence. They pertain to the outward, visible, 

 concrete world of history and of experience, and 

 can be settled in no court but the court of reason. 



Dr. Abbott says (and he assumes to speak for " the 

 great mass of Christian believers ") " that there are 

 propositions which men ought to believe without 

 logically satisfying evidence." This is what the 

 old mother church used to say, and used to back it 

 up with the stake and the rack. " Ought to be- 

 lieve ; " that is, it is a man's duty to believe cer- 

 tain propositions addressed to his rational faculties, 

 without rationally satisfying evidence. It is to be 

 regretted that the good doctor did not cite some 

 theological or religious proposition, or some article 

 from the creeds, that it is a man's duty thus to be- 

 lieve. Would he say that a man ought to believe 

 any of the points in dispute between Professor 

 Huxley and Dr. Wace without " logically satisfying 

 evidence " ? — the swine story, the authorship of 



