138 THE LIGHT OF DAY 



I recently read the confessions of a Catholic about 

 his religion. He said he could not accept the Bible 

 upon its own evidence ; he must have some exterior 

 authority to authenticate it to him. This he found 

 in his church. His reason revolted at the idea of 

 an infallible book, but not at the idea of an infalli- 

 ble Pope. He could accept one upon its own evi- 

 dence, but not the other. Was not this man a bom 

 Catholic ? 



" Few minds in earnest," says Cardinal Newman, 

 " can remain at ease without some sort of rational 

 grounds for their religious belief ; " but see what 

 kind of " grounds " he plants his house of faith 

 upon. Most of us would consider them treacher- 

 ous and shifting sands. Read how he argues him- 

 self into accepting the dogma of transubstantiation. 

 " Why should it not be ? What 's to hinder it ? 

 What do I know of substance and matter ? Just as 

 much as the greatest philosopher, and that is nothing 

 at all." Certain types of mind will find this reason- 

 ing sufficient. If we are already convinced, how 

 little it takes to convince us ! To certain other 

 types of mind it is very much like reasoning 

 whether or not Santa Claus comes down the chim- 

 ney. What 's to hinder ? The chimney is open 

 at the top, and has a definite capacity of good, 

 honest cubic inches. How do I know who or what 

 comes down the chimney, with its open shaft up 

 there in the mysterious darkness ? Newman ac- 

 cepts the dogma of the Immaculate Conception on 

 scarcely more tangible grounds ; namely, " because it 



