31. Unconditional reliance upon Providence
on the subject of defence
What then is the principle for which we contend?
An unquestioning reliance upon Providence for defence in all those cases in which we should violate His laws by defending ourselves.
The principle can claim a species of merit that must at least be denied to some systems of morality:
that of simplicity, of easiness of apprehension, of adaptation to every understanding, and of applicability to every circumstance of life.
If a wisdom that we acknowledge to be unerring has determined and declared that any given conduct is right, and that it is good for man, it appears preposterous and irreverent to argue that another can be better.
The Almighty certainly knows our interests, and if he has not directed us in the path that promotes them, the conclusion is inevitable that he has voluntarily directed us amiss.
Will the advocate of war abide this conclusion? And if he will not, how will he avoid the opposite conclusion: that the path of forbearance is the path of expediency?
It would seem to be a position of very simple truth, that it becomes an erring being to regulate his actions by an acquiescent reference to an unerring will.
That it is necessary for one of these erring beings formally to insist upon this truth, and systematically to prove it to his fellows, may reasonably be a subject of grief and of shame.
But the audacity of guilt denies the truth, and the speculative nature of philosophy practically supersedes it, so the necessity therefore remains.