ThetheoryismostexplicitlyworkedoutintheGrammarofAssent。Newmanexertsallhisskillinexpoundingaverysounddoctrine。Asamatteroffact，weforminnumerablejudgmentsbywhathecallsthe’illativesense’；thatistosay，notbyformalargument，butbyacomplexsystemof’implicit’reasonings。
’Logic，’ashesays，’doesnotreallyprove。Itenablesustojoinissuewithothers……itverifiesnegatively’；andfor’genuineproofinconcretematterwerequireanorganismmoredelicate，versatile，andelastic，thanverbalargumentation。’244*Logicisachainwhich’hangslooseatbothends，’245*forthefirstprinciplesmustbeassumed，andtheabstractconceptneverfitstheactualcomplexityofconcretefact。Bythe’illativesense，’again，wereachinnumerabletruths。WeholdthatEnglandisanisland，orthatthemanwhomweseeisourbrother，withafaithindistinguishablefromabsoluteconviction。Wegofurther；webelievethatafriendishonest，or，say，thatCaesarcrossedtheRubicon，withoutadmittingtheslightestscrupleofdoubt。Allknowledgewhateveroffactplainlyimpliessomethingdifferentfromformallogic；
and，sofar，theonlyquestionseemstobewhysopalpableatruthneedssoelaborateandgracefulanexposition。TheanswerisindicatedbythepolemicagainstLocke。Lockehadproposed，asatestofaloveoftruth，therefusaltoholdanyproposition，withagreaterassurancethantheproofsitisbuiltonwillwarrant。’246*ThestatementseemstobenotonlyunassailablebutinconformitywithNewman’sdoctrine。ShouldwebelieveEnglandtobeanisland？WhenJuliusCaesarlanded，itwasnotproved；andhewouldhavebeenwrongtobecertain。Whendiditbecomerighttobecertain？Surelyatwhatevermomentitwasadequatelyproved。Itisneversoprovedthattodenyitwouldbeself-contradictory，butbythistimeitisasmuchprovedasanyfactcanbeproved。Lockewouldsimplyjustifyhimselfbysayingthatinthiscaseour’assurance’doesnotexceedthe’proofsonwhichitisbuilt。’Theapproximationtodemonstrationisindefinitelyclose，thoughneverabsolute，andthedifferencebecomestoosmalltobeperceptible。Adifficultyemergesonlyifweatonceadmittherightnessofbeliefanddenythesufficiencyoftheevidence。
Newman，havingshownthatwebelieveinconcretetruthsnotprovedbyabstractlogic，arguesthatwealsoassumemanytruthsnotprovedevenbysufficientempiricalevidence。WehavewhatLockecalleda’surplusageofassurance。’Thefact，again，isundeniable。Webelieveimplicitlyincountlessthingsuponinsufficientevidence。This，asLockewouldadd，isonemainexplanationoftheprevalenceoferror，andalsoaproofthaterrormaybeinnocent。Itisadutytobecandid；itcannotbeadutytoberight。Wemustlistentoreason；buttheeffectofreasoningmustdependupontheconstitutionofourminds，andthevariousbeliefswithwhichtheyarealreadystored。NowtoNewmanthisdoctrinealwaysseemstobesceptical。Itamountstothe’liberalising’viewthatallcreedsareequallygoodifonlytheybeequallysincere。Hencehelaysstressuponthedoctrinethat’assent’isavolitionalaswellasan’intellectualact。’Itisourdutytoobeythereason；andwhenthe’illativesense’
declaresthetruthofaproposition，weareboundtoan’activerecognition’ofthetruth。247*Locke，onthecontrary，holdsthatifwelistentoreason，theassentfollowsautomaticallybyanon-voluntaryact。
OnNewman’sshowing，anelementofvolitionintrudesintologic。Beliefbelongstoactionaswellastopurespeculation。
’Toactyoumustassume，’hesays，’andthatassumptionisfaith。’248*Ifactinguponanhypothesisisthesamethingasbelievingthetruthtobedemonstrated，thisleadstoasingularresult。Ajudge，saysNewman，actsupontheassumptionthatacriminal’sguiltisproved。249*Yet，asitisnevermathematicallydemonstrated，hehasa’surplusageofassurance。’
Thejudgemaybeofopinionthattheprisoner’sguiltishighlyprobableandyetbeboundtoacquit。Ishetobelievethattheprisoner’sinnocenceisdemonstrated？Thecasereallyshowstheopposite：simplythataswehavetoactuponprobabilities，wearenottheless，butthemore，boundtoguardagainsttheillusionthattheyarecertainties。Ateverymomentandineveryrelationofourlives，weareforcedtoactuponimperfectknowledge。Theobviousinferenceisthatweareboundtokeepinmindthatitisimperfect；orotherwiseweshallbemorallyboundtocommitintellectuallyerror。If，therefore，acreedbenotdemonstrablytrue，wemaywiselyactasifitweretrue，buthavenorighttodenythatweareactinguponprobability。Butler’sfamousdoctrinethat’probabilitymustbetheguideoflife，’istrueif’properlyexplained。’Butthedifficultyisthat，inreligiousquestions，’certitude’isdeclaredtobeessential；itmustcorrespondtosomethingmorethana’balanceofarguments’；250*andyetthecertituderestsuponfaith，andfaithis’assumption。’Theprobabilitymustbesomehowconvertedintocertainty。IntheEssayonDevelopment，NewmanmeetsLockebydeclaringthat’calculationnevermadeahero，’andpraisingtheFathersfor’believingfirstandprovingafterwards。’251*
Thoughcalculationdoesnotmakeahero，itisessentialtomakingheroismuseful。Thetrueheroisthemanwhoisreadytoact，thoughhefairlyestimatesthechancesandknowsperhapsthattheymeanaprobabilityofdeath。
Thisgivestherealdilemma。Allowconvictiontobeinfluencedbythewill，andyoumustadmitthatabeliefmorallyrightmaybeintellectuallywrong。Youjustifythejudgeformistakingpresumptionfordemonstration，andthechildforbelievingthatadrunkenparentisstrictlysober。Ifso，yousanctionerroneousbeliefs。Andthisadmittedlyappliesinparticulartoreligiousbeliefs。Theworld，itisgranted，isfulloffalsebeliefs，attainedpreciselybyyourmethod。NotonemanintenofallthathavelivedhasbelongedtothetrueChurch。Newman，infact，admitsthathisultimateproofis’subjective。’Thereisnoultimatetestoftruthbeside’thetestimonybornetotruthbytheminditself。’252*Hedoesnot，indeed，denythepossibilityofdemonstration：heoftenassertsit；butheholdsthatthedemonstrationwillnotinfactconvince。Mendifferintheirfirstprinciples，andhecannotchangeaman’sprinciplesmorethanhecanmakeacrookedmanstraightorablindmansee。253*Hencewehavethefinalanswer。Wehavereallytodesertalogicalgroundandtotakeourstanduponinstinct。Ourinstinctsareinonerespectinfallible。
Beliefinrevealedreligiondependsuponbeliefinnaturalreligion。Naturalreligionisfoundedontheconscience。Theconsciencemeansthesenseofsin，andthereforethedesireforintercessionwhichissatisfiedbythepriesthood。Thereligionofphilosophyignorestheconscience，thoughitrecognisesthemoralsense。254*Theorderoftheworld，indeed，seemstocontradictthis。Whatstrikesthemind’soforciblyandsopainfully’isGod’sabsencefromHisownworld。Hehasleftmeninignorance，andisa’hiddenGod。’Weareforcedtotheconclusionthat’eitherthereisnoCreatororHehasdisownedHiscreatures。’255*Suchdoubts’callfortheexerciseofgoodsenseandforstrengthofwilltoputthemdownwithahighhandasirrationalorpreposterous。’256*Why’irrational，’iftheycannotbeanswered？Newman，indeed，declaresthatheisascertainoftheexistenceofGodasofhisown，althoughhehasadifficultyinputtingthegroundsofhiscertitudeinto’moodandfigure。’257*Thepositionisillustratedbyaremarkablesermon258*inwhich，afterhisconversion，heagainappliestheold’kill-or-cure’remedy。Heputsthevariousdifficultiesoftheisticbeliefwithhisusualforce。Hedeclaresthatthereare’irrefragable’demonstrationsofthedoctrine；butheadmitsthedifficulties。259*Theyaresogreat，indeed，thatifyouoncebelieveinGodyouneednotshrinkfromacceptinganyofthemysteriesoftheCatholiccreed。TheresultseemstobethatwhileNewmandeclaresthat’demonstrations’exist，healsoemphaticallydeclaresthattheywillnotpracticallyconvince。
Theprooffortheordinarymindmustdependuponthe’illativesense’；andtheillativesenseimpliestheexistenceoftheconscience，and，moreover，oftheconscienceasdistinguishedfromthe’moralsense。’The’moralsense’leadsonlytothehollowmoralityof’so-calledcivilisation’andofsuperficialphilosophy。Toconvincemenwemustappealtotheirconscience。
Butfortheconsciencehewouldbe’anatheist，apantheist，orapolytheistwhenhelookedintotheworld，’thatis，ifguidedbyexperiencealone。260*
What，then，is，asheputsit，the’burdenedconscience’
whichismytrueinformant？261*Theconscienceisthesenseofsin。Ittellsusofajudge；ofonewhois’angrywithusandthreatensevil。’Ittellsusoftheneedofatonement，andyetoftheabsenceofGodfromtheworld。Naturalreligion，thefoundationofrevealedreligion，istherefore，asLucretiussaid，ayoke；it’burdensandsaddensthereligiousmind。’Itproves，too，thedoctrineofwhichButlerwasthe’greatmaster，’theabsolutenecessityof’vicariouspunishment。’262*Thus，ashesays，inanotherfamouspassage，naturalreligionteachesgloomandhorrorofourselves。Tobe’superstitious……isnature’sbestoffering，hermostacceptableservice，hermostmatureandenlargedwisdom，inthepresenceofaholyandoffendedGod。Theywhoarenotsuperstitiouswithoutthegospel，willnotbereligiouswithit。’263*
Thisis，indeed，therealpithofthedoctrine。Withoutaskingwhatmaybethelogicaldemonstration，theactualpersuasiveforceistheappealtotheconscienceasa’senseofsin。’StartingfromtheconceptionoftheChurchimpliedinWard’sIdeal，thatistheforegoneconclusion。WeaccepttheChurchtheology，becausewefeeltheterrorwhichtheChurchsoothes。Newman，aswasinevitablefromtheconfusionbetweenrulesofconductandcanonsoflogic，hasgivenustherealcauseofbelief，butnotagoodreasonforbelieving。Andheretheapologistsarepreciselyatonewiththeordinarydeistoftheeighteenthcentury。Theyagreethatthedoctrinewasacceptedbecauseitfellinwith’naturalreligion’in’superstition。’ThepoweroftheChurch，orthepowerofpriest-craft，dependsessentiallyuponthebeliefinitspowerofpardoningsinandreconcilingmantoGod。Thedifferenceisthatthedeistassertedthesuperstitiontobefalse，andpardonaquackremedy；whereasNewmanseesafundamentaltruthinthesuperstition，andthefullexplanationintherevelationcommittedtotheChurch。How，then，istheissuetobedecided？Youarewrong，saysNewman，asablindmanjudgingofcoloursiswrong。Youhavequenchedtheconscience，andthereforehavenoguide。Yet，ifablindmancanneverrealisewhatsightis，noblindmaneverdoubtsthatsightexists。NothingiseasierthantoprovetohimthatIhavemeansofknowledgewhichhedoesnotpossess。Why，ifconsciencerevealstruths，cannotthetruthsbeimpressedevenuponthosewhohavenoconscience？WhyshouldIbelievethatyourtheoryisright，whentheultimatetestisonewhich，byitsnature，canappealonlytoitsownauthority？Ifmenhaveradicallydifferentinstinctswhichcanbebroughttonocommonmeasure，scepticismistheinevitableresult，unlessasupernaturalauthoritycanbeapplied。ThatispreciselyNewman’sconclusion；leavementothemselves，hesays，andtheywillhaveno’commonmeasure，’
unlesscontrolledbyasupremepower。The’absoluteneedofaspiritualsupremacy’isthe’strongestargumentinitsfavour。’264*
ThisgivesNewman’srelationtothephilosophyofthetime。
The’irrefragabledemonstrations’oftheschoolsareleftinthebackground。Grantingthemtobeirrefragable，dotheyproveordisprovehispoint？Doesthe’firstcause’argumentproperlyleadtoNatureortotheGodofCatholicism？Tooverlookthisistoassumethatyourreasoningisconfirmedbytheverylogictowhichitisradicallyopposed。IsNewmanreallyscepticalwhenhedeniesthevalidityofthescientificview，orthemanofsciencewhenhedeniesthevalidityofNewman’s？Whatistherelationof’science’tophilosophy？Privatejudgmentissaidtolead，inreligion，toscepticism。Theobviousreplyisthatinthephysicalsciencesithasledtoindisputabletruths。Whencethedifference？Newmanspeaksasthoughtheproofsofscientifictruthsrestedexclusivelyupontheargumentsforeachpropositionseparately。MenofscienceacceptNewton’stheory，hesays，withoutrigidlytestingiteachforhimself，andassumethatitconformstothefacts，eveniftheconformitybenotobvious。265*Believersintheologyshouldmakesimilarassumptions。Butthisomitstherealgroundofconviction。WebelieveinNewton’stheoryofgravitation，notsimplybecausewehavereadthePrincipia；notevensimplybecausetheargumentispartofawholesystemofconsistentandindependenttruths；butalsobecauseitcanbeverifiedbyproofsintelligibletoall，andbecauseitcanpredictfactsopentotheseveresttests。Theenormousauthorityofscienceisnotduetothefactthatitisbelievedbythisorthatexpertorbodyofexperts，butbecauseitmanifestsitspowerbyworkingwonderswhicharenotmiracles。