entitled to deny the possibility of what may be termed an organ of spiritual discernment.  In fact to do so would be to vacate the position of pure agnosticism in toto—­and this even if there were no objective, or strictly scientific, evidences in favour of such an organ, such as we have in the lives of the saints, and, in a lower degree, in the universality of the religious sentiment.  Now, if there be such an organ, it follows from preceding paragraphs, that not only will the main evidences for Christianity be subjective, but that they ought to be so:  they ought to be so, I mean, on the Christian supposition of the object of Christianity being moral probation, and ‘faith’ both the test and the reward.

From this many practical considerations ensue.  E.g. the duty of parents to educate their children in what they believe as distinguished from what they know.  This would be unjustifiable if faith were the same as opinion.  But it is fully justifiable if a man not only knows that he believes (opinion) but believes that he knows (faith).  Whether or not the Christian differs from the ‘natural man’ in having a spiritual organ of cognition, provided he honestly believes such is the case, it would be immoral in him not to proceed in accordance with what he thus believes to be his knowledge.  This obligation is recognized in education in every other case.  He is morally right even if mentally deluded.

Huxley, in Lay Sermons, says that faith has been proved a ’cardinal sin’ by science.  Now, this is true enough of credulity, superstition, &c., and science has done no end of good in developing our ideas of method, evidence, &c.  But this is all on the side of intellect.  ‘Faith’ is not touched by such facts or considerations.  And what a terrible hell science would have made of the world, if she had abolished the ’spirit of faith’ even in human relations.  The fact is, Huxley falls into the common error of identifying ‘faith’ with opinion.

Supposing Christianity true, it is very reasonable that faith in the sense already explained should be constituted the test of divine acceptance.  If there be such a thing as Christ’s winnowing fan, the quality of sterling weight for the discovery of which it is adapted cannot be conceived as anything other than this moral quality.  No one could suppose a revelation appealing to the mere intellect of man, since acceptance would thus become a mere matter of prudence in subscribing to a demonstration made by higher intellects.

It is also a matter of fact that if Christianity is truthful in representing this world as a school of moral probation, we cannot conceive a system better adapted to this end than is the world, or a better schoolmaster than Christianity.  This is proved not only by general reasoning, but also by the work of Christianity in the world, its adaptation to individual needs, &c.  Consider also the extraordinary diversity of human characters in respect both of morality and spirituality though all are living in the same world.  Out of the same external material or environment such astonishingly diverse products arise according to the use made of it.  Even human suffering in its worst forms can be welcome if justified by faith in such an object.  ’Ills have no weight, and tears no bitterness,’ but are rather to be ’gloried in[56].’