344 
sibility, and a true Religious precept an integral part of 
Deontology : yet provided that they are truly such, we 
urge that there can be nothing to prejudice them, in their 
appearing as a kind of later discovery in the moral system. 
116. Indeed it might suffice for our argument, that 
uiS? of ta fhe ^ ere should be no antagonism between the Dis- 
epi ritual and coveries, or additional truths, of the “ Revelation,” 
missibia 13 & in and the true-always on which our moral agency de- 
ances. assist ’ P en( ls. It is clear that a revelation which comes 
to the assistance of the moral system, implies at 
once that that system is, de facto , defective. But this we 
have already admitted; and found in the admission an 
argument for Supreme Moral Government, which is not 
without weight when the elevation of our Personal Probation 
is the object before us. We cannot, of course, on the pretence 
of such elevation, admit of any antagonism (such as some 
indeed have set up) between the alleged Spiritual and the 
known Moral. Religion apart from the conscience, or moral 
nature, is inconceivable ; it would be an idea of goodness as 
opposed to the true-always, which is a contradiction. 
117. But the notion of any Religious development for us in 
the moral system itself is sometimes opposed, as if interference 
by a Supreme Governor, or new dealing with the established 
order of the moral world, were in itself impossible; yet 
in admitting the absolute necessity of such a Governor 
have we not already conceded such interference ? nor can it 
be objected that interference would affect the foundations of 
Deontology, since the Supreme is Himself in perfect relation 
Revelation the true-always . — “ Shall not the Judge of all 
implies speci- the earth do right ? ” is a sufficient reflection for 
with theMond every one, except the Comteist who conceives Will 
System. and Order to be irreconcileable, and that to admit 
Causation at any point is to disturb the mechanism of the 
Universe. But we have to deal with those only who acknow- 
ledge the facts of our nature. 
118. No doubt, the teachings of any particular Religious Reve- 
lation must be tested before they are adopted as assistance to 
Deontology. This is matter of detail and not a priori difficulty. 
Possible in- We wou ld rather ask, indeed, whether Moral 
of m th 1 e te M S rai -R es P ons ikility itself would not in some cases be 
System with- open to dispute, in the absence — supposing it 
out Religion. were g0 — 0 f a p those alleviations and assistances 
which Religion professes to give ? — Religion is so real a need, 
the natural efforts at Virtue are in themselves so imperfect, 
and even the ideas of common duty so much in want of 
information and help, if not of definition, that morality itself 
