Is it not as improbable that a man should rise from the dead at the last day, as that he should return from a state of manhood to that which preceded his birth.
This question of the infidel demands some attention, as well as the question in view.
Arg. 5. “There is a strong objection against the probability of Spectres, which is sufficient to prove that they are not intelligent creatures; or at least, that they possess so small a degree of intelligence, that they are unqualified to act with prudence, to propose any end to themselves, or use the proper means to accomplish that end. Ghosts often appear in order to discover some crime; but they never appear to a magistrate, or person in authority, but to some illiterate clown, who happens to live near the place where the crime was perpetrated: to some person who has no connection with the affair at all, and who, in general, is the most improper in the world for making the discovery.”
In Glanville’s Saducismus Triumphatus, we have the following story:—
“James Haddock, a farmer, was married to Eleanor Welsh, by whom he had a son. After the death of Haddock, his wife married one Davis, and both agreed to defraud the son by the former marriage, of a lease bequeathed to him by his father. Upon this the ghost of Haddock appeared to one Francis Tavernor, the servant of Lord Chichester, and desired him to go to Eleanor Welsh and inform her that it was the will of her former husband that the son should enjoy the lease. Tavernor did not at first execute this commission, but he was continually haunted by the apparition in the most hideous shapes, which even threatened to tear him in pieces, till at last he delivered the message. Now had this Spectre the least common sense, it would have appeared first to Eleanor Welsh and her husband, Davis, and frightened them into compliance at once, and not have kept poor Tavernor in such constant disquietude, who had no concern in the matter.”
Here we find several propositions with regard to Spectres in general, which demand credit only for one short story, the truth of which might be as consistently disputed by the apparitionists, as by the Encyclopedia. It does not appear that this apparition was seen or heard by any one except Tavernor. What evidence then have we that Tavernor was not the dupe of one who personated Haddock out of pity to the orphan son?
Could our authors imagine that Mr. Addison, Doctor Johnson, or even Mr. Glanville himself, built the faith of Spectres, only on such feeble evidence as this story affords?
Will that mode of conduct adopted by Tavernor’s Spectre, teach us what is the conduct of Spectres in general, till we, who believe the reality of Spectres, can be satisfied whether Tavernor ever saw a Spectre or not?
Circumstances unknown to us, however, might be so attached to that affair, as to render it credible to Davis and his wife, if not to others.
Therefore, admitting the supposition of our believing it a reality, how have our authors proved that this very Spectre conducted imprudently, proposed no end to himself, or used no proper means to accomplish that end? “Because, say they, he did not first appear to Eleanor Welsh and her husband, and frighten them into compliance at once.” But how does it appear that this summary method, all things considered, would have been the most eligible. Doubtless some infidels are bold enough to say that the angel, who sent Moses to Pharaoh from Horeb, would have conducted much more prudently and rationally, if he had first appeared to Pharaoh, and frightened him into compliance at once, than to have kept Moses in such disquietude, who had less concern in the matter than any man in Egypt, for he was now married and peaceably settled in another land. The end proposed by the ghost appearing to Tavernor was, that the son of Haddock should enjoy the lease, and this end was subordinate and absolutely necessary to other ends of far greater magnitude, for any thing which the Cyclopedia has shewn to the contrary.