48 
which man feels to be a duty ; or a moral code of duties, more 
or less perfectly elaborated, enforced with the sanction of law, 
and demanding a literal obedience. Yv hen I wish to express 
the former meaning, I shall use the term, e< the moral law ; 
when the latter, I shall designate it “ a moral code/" . 
12. My first position is that philosophy has determined that 
man has a moral nature, capable of recognizing moral respon- 
sibility, accompanied with a sense of duty which, although it 
may vary in degree, is never entirely absent. Unless he pos- 
sessed this, all revelation would be impossible. In proof of 
this proposition, it will be only necessary to refer to the 
papers of Dr. Irons, and to assume that he has demonstrated 
its truth until his reasonings have been proved to be un- 
sound. I shall only make one additional observation. The 
contrary position is in direct opposition to the testimony of 
every language which has been spoken by man, and if it 
could be assumed as true, it would be necessary that every 
language under heaven should be reconstructed ; for it is im- 
possible to express the views of my opponents . in human 
language, without either altering the meaning of its terms or 
doing violence to its fundamental forms of thought. If the 
terms of language constitute a record of the universal experi- 
ence of mankind, they yield a testimony, the force of which 
it is impossible to evade, that the whole human race have re- 
cognized the existence of the principle of duty or obligation, 
if not in an elevated, at any rate in a modified form. Let it be 
observed, that revelation never attempts to prove responsibility. 
It takes for granted that man feels himself to be a responsible 
agent, and that this knowledge exists independently of 
revelation. 
13. Assuming the principle of responsibility in man,his ability 
to discover a moral law of some sort is a necessary deduction 
from it. The moral law which he recognizes may be extremely 
imperfect ; but his recognition of obligation of some kind 
is no theory, but a fact, to the existence of which all history 
and all language testify. In examining the. facts with 
which she has to deal, philosophy freely admits that the 
standard of moral obligation which the bulk of mankind have 
actually recognized has been one of striking imperfection. It 
has varied greatly in different ages and countries.. Its 
obligations may have been bounded within the narrowest limits, 
but within them they have been felt to be duties. . The in- 
vestigation of the causes of this, and the reconciliation of. it 
with man's possession of intuitive moral perceptions, lies 
beyond the limits which can be assigned to this paper. Pnilo- 
sophy also, no less distinctly, recognizes the fact that whether 
