"But," says our rationalist, " reason could master, at least, some of these truths, such as the existence of God, the necessity of divine worship, the fact of an hereafter," etc. Still, we say, it was necessary for God to reveal even these, else see what would happen. Every child on attaining the use of reason would be bound, under pain of mortal sin, to begin the independent study of these extremely difficult truths; and whether mentally qualified or not, whether his parents could afford the expense or not, he would be obliged to study and study for years and years until he had thoroughly mastered them. Is such a life consistent with youthful levity? Where would be the time for secular education? Would not God be a tyrant to command such impossibilities? Again, even supposing all could afford to spend the best years of their lives in acquiring the knowledge of God and of natural religion, with what certainty would they cling to the knowledge acquired; with what zeal reduce it to practice? If reason errs, as it does, in simple matters, how much more liable is it to err in these loftier truths! And because these truths are hard, therefore, does reason sometimes lead me to one conclusion and my neighbor to another directly opposite. Now I am bound to accept the conclusions of reason — but which, my own or my neighbor's? Here, then, we would be, after all our years of study, as much in darkness and doubt as at the beginning. Nor is this all mere fiction — it is fact. Take, for example, the Roman Empire of long ago. The Romans had no revelation, and see where reason
