truth of all Natural Theology;* since all our inferences concerning the Divine powers and faculties depend upon the comparison to be drawn between them and human endowments,-between the feeble and fading labours of man, and the effort which made and provides for a whole human race throughout hundreds of generations,-between the dark mind of man and the all-searching Spirit of God,-between the fallen creature and his all-perfect Creator.

You have asserted, that "Revelation cannot be true if Natural Religion is false."+ We might reverse this, and say, that all Natural Religion must be false, if that bright line of Holy Scripture be not true; for, unless the Almighty Creator be in a manner like unto some earthly thing, we can form neither judgment nor conception of him; and, rejecting the likeness of man, we can find nothing earthly to serve, by any possibility, as the image of Wisdom, Power, and Benevolence. Would that I and all could feel, with a more intense regret, how degraded and sinful is this once holy image of the God of all goodness!

This explanatory line, from the light of Revelation, might have elucidated and strengthened an opinion or theory in the "Discourse,” (pp. 33 and 78.) Having boldly made the assumption, or humbly accepted the Revelation, that a Divine Spirit, something comparable to the human mind, has been at work in all the creation, we cannot but acknowledge that every induction of facts from the natural world favours the assurance.

"Discourse," p. 204.

When it is seen that all which is commendable in rational Theology is propounded as such in the Scriptures, we may fairly say, that, if the copious and complete "Natural Religion" contained in the Bible be not true, there may be some reason to doubt the remainder of the book; but surely you cannot mean that the validity of Revelation depends upon the unerring truth of any one known human exposition of Theology or Religion; whether it be in your "Discourse," or in the works of Cicero,* or elsewhere.

The Bible is replete with the inductive arguments of Natural Theology and rational Religion.

• You declare Cicero "the ancient philosopher best imbued with religious opinions," (in the "Dedication" of the "Discourse.") I have had the satisfaction to hear you proclaim, in the presence of two or three thousand well informed Christians, that "the Bible is the best of books," "for all men;" (I think I am nearly correct;) and, if this be your candid and carefully formed opinion, you must be convinced that the theology, religion, and morality of Rome and Greece, even at the best, are no longer to be upheld. It is full time, all men should know, that, though there may be some truth and goodness in the ancient classics, it requires something more than a classical knowledge to make the selection with safety. The just prosperity of a country is not unequivocally promoted, when a senator makes Homer corroborate his opinions; neither is it probable that the moral advancement of the nation is hastened by a taste for the pagan poets. The difference between the heathen morality and that of Christianity, is like that which exists between the fruits of the earth before and after cultivation: all is good with judicious culture; without it, little is good, some bitter, some poisonous, and much is unprofitable.

"I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”*

This

is one among a great number of plain theological inferences that occurred in the common and probably youthful reflections of an ancient shepherd, and it is one of those simple and forcible truths that might justly be expected to receive universal assent; the difficulty presents itself only when we are assured that reflecting men have ever lived who could doubt that they had a Maker.

The wonderful contrivances employed in a hand or foot scarcely require the art of the dissector to set them forth; it is manifest that each part is marvellously adapted to its varied and innumerable purposes. The origin, growth, and nourishment of the living body are arranged with so mysterious a skill, that the facts can scarcely fail to astound any one who is willing to dwell, even but cursorily, on the contemplation of them; and the imperfect and partial explanations of the physiologist seem to me calculated rather to perplex than to enlighten the mind in its approach, (if it may be called an approach,) to the Great First Cause.

Should it turn out to be true, which I incline strongly to deny, that every increase in our knowledge

• Psalm cxxxix. 14. "I will praise thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works, and that my soul knoweth right well."

of natural causes brings us closer to the Great First Cause, that science necessarily makes us better acquainted with our Maker,-then indeed must science be a holy and desirable thing. I know not, however, if this be Newton's* meaning, and if it is, still it may be erroneous; it is natural to err in favour of our pleasures. Supposing the universe, the world, or a human frame, to have been set in complete operation at once by the Word of God, every event in the process must have been, and must still be, equally near to the Great First Cause. The parent precedes the offspring in point of time, yet both may possibly have had their origin at the same moment.

I find in physiological enquiries that the chains of causes are not direct lines, which the mind must necessarily pursue, link by link, step by step, up to the Creator; but rather, that the chains of causes are complete circles, with the Almighty hand equally near, equally plain everywhere: so, probably, it was to Newton; and thus some men have ever found it,

• "Discourse," p. 151. Did Newton wish to signify that the knowledge of nature helped to mature his acquaintance with the characters of God, or even more than this? "Every true step made in inductive philosophy is highly to be valued, because it brings us nearer to the First Cause." To be nearer, without being aware of it, is of little advantage; but it is far easier to grow in the knowledge of God and His goodness without the study of Physics than with it. Experience, I think, is with me in this.

look where they might, even in unlearned simplicity. On the other hand it is notorious, that hosts of learned men have not so found it. In their case, I offer a choice of explanations. Either they have busied themselves with the endless circles of natural causes, or they have taken up a chain of so great a length, that their approach to the Great First Cause has been actually imperceptible, even through the continuance of a long life.

Were all men to follow science, and work out lengthened chains of causes for amusement, the ablest would construct the longest, but all would soon find their advance arrested by some insurmountable difficulty; which would first occur to the simple, and lastly to the learned; both, however, should attain the point of wonder, abasement of self, and reverence for the Creator. In this respect, the simple man is foremost and most willing; he has least pride: "knowledge puffeth up." The wisdom of this world is "foolishness." "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom;" it is "clean, enduring for ever.”

The opinion that earthly sciences may be serviceable in our future being, is not a little doubtful. The man of science might very positively predicate of the future existence, that a more extended knowledge shall form one of its great enjoyments; yet he would quickly perceive the vagueness of his own notions (if they deserve the name) when he should attempt to explain