On this fubject Mr. Scott is not always confiftent with himfelf. In a fentence almoft immediately following that which we have laft quoted, he fays that "The existence of motion proves the operation of mind, and leads us by a chain of irresistible evidence to the admiffion of an eternal and fupreme intelligent principle; but it by no means compels us to admit the conftant interference of that principle, where. ever motion is obferved or change produced." But if matter be indifferent to rest or uniform motion in a ftraight line, which is certainly implied in Newton's firft Jaw of motion; and if that law be an axiom neceffarily refulting from the inertia of matter, as is univerfally admitted by the philofophers of the Newtonian fchool, fomething very near to the reverfe of all this must be the truth. Had all the motions in the univerfe been uniform and rectilineal, we could not from their existence have drawn any inference for the operation of mind, which would not flow equally from the exiflence of reft; but as the great motions of the heavenly bodies are neither uniform nor rectilineal, the fame law compels us to admit the conftant application of that force, by which the deflection or change from rectilineal motion was at first produced. On the whole, we feel ourselves compelled by the force of evidence to agree with Dr. Reid in thofe conclufions, which it is the aim of Mr. Scott in this chapter to over turn. "The greatest difcovery ever made in natural philofophy, was that of the law of gravitation, which opens fuch a view of our planetary fyftem, that it looks like fomething divine. But the author of this difcovery was perfectly aware, that he had difcovered no real caufe, but only the law or rule, according to which the unknown cause operates. "The whole object of natural philofophy, as NEWTON CXprefsly teaches, is reducible to thefe two heads; firft by a juft induction from experiment and obfervation, to difcover the laws of nature, and then to apply thofe laws to the folution of the phænomena of nature. This was all that this great philofopher attempted, and all that he thought attainable. And this indeed he attained in a great meafure, with regard to the motions of the planetary fyftem, and with regard to the rays of light. "But fuppofing that all the phænomena that fall within the reach of our fenfes, were accounted for from general laws of nature, justly deduced from experience; that is, fuppofing natural philofophy brought to its utmost perfection, it does not difcover the efficient caufe of any one phænomenon in nature. The The laws of nature are the rules according to which the effects are produced; but there must be a caufe, which operates according to thefe rules. The laws of navigation never navi gated a fhip. The rules of architecture never built a houfe *" To this Inquiry into the Limits and peculiar Objects of Physical and Metaphyfical Science is fubjoined an Appendix in two numbers, of which the former confifts of fome obfervations on the queftions at iffue between the Neceffarians and their opponents, concerning the free agency of man. These reflections are judicious, and fuch as any man of good fenfe may fully understand; but we have found in them nothing that is new; whilft on one occafion the author feems to betray a very limited acquaintance with the writings of the Neceffarians. "In all the reafonings of the Neceffarians," he fays (p. 270), it is plainly taken for granted that motives are fomething external to the mind;" but fome of the Necef farians, fuch as the redoubtable Mr. Belham, writing with ftudied obfcurity on this fubject, include in their complex notion of motives the State of the mind, comprising under it the very energy of volition; and then affect to laugh at their antagonists, for contending that man has the power of doing an action or its contrary, the ftate of the mind and all previous circumftances, including volition, remaining the fame f!! In this part of the Appendix Mr. Scott takes it for granted, as he had endeavoured to prove in the body of his work, that human power is an immediate object of human consciousness. We are inclined to think, with Dr. Reid, that we are con fcious only of the actual exertion of power; but the queftion feems to be of no great importance; and for Mr. Scott's opinion, though we hefitate to adopt it, we could urge a more powerful argument than any that feem to have occurred to himself. This, however, is not our prefent bufinefs; and therefore we pafs on to the fecond number of the Appendix, which is entitled, Illuftrations, Philological and Philofophical, of the Dif tinction between Activity and Caufation, by Dr. Gregory. A more accurate title would have been, A Review of certain luftrations Philological and Philofophical, by Dr. Gregory, of the Distinction between Activity and Caufation; for fuch a reView this Number of Mr. Scott's Appendix is, and it is no thing else; though the Illuftrations reviewed have not yet Reid's Efays on the active Powers of Man. Efay 1. Chap. 6. + See our 21ft vol. p. 138. been publifhed. To form a judgment of the merit of fuck Illuftrations from the view of them which is here given, would be very unfair; because it is poffible that Mr. Scott, like ourselves and other reviewers, may have occafionally miftaken his author's meaning; and because it is only the philological part of the Illuftrations, and not even the whole of that part, which Mr. Scott has extracted from his friend's manufcripts. Thefe partial extracts, however, are fufficient to increase the intenfity of that with which we expreffed, when we entered on the review of the work before us. We have, indeed, obferved nothing in them which leads us to fufpect, that Dr. Gregory's notions of caufation are different from our own, or that he holds thofe opinions of Mr. Scott, which we have ventured to controvert. It is indeed apparent, from what Dr. Gregory has publifhed on the fubject, that he believes-nay, that he confiders it as a felfevident and neceffary truth, that there can he no change or event, which does not proceed immediately or ultimately from the energy of fome active being; and this is all for which we have contended, in oppofition to Mr. Scott. Dr. Gregory too admits, that there are fome changes which imply the im mediate and conflant application of fome active energy and force; and among thefe, we are perfuaded, he reckons the conftant deflection of the planets towards the fun. If fo,. there is probably a perfect agreement between him and us; for we have no objection to admit, that there may be other changes, which imply nothing more than than the original fiat of the Almighty, which conftituted the univerfe in its prefent form; and that the motion which balances gravity may be one of thefe. 06 The language of Mr. Scott himfelf, in this part of the Appendix is fometimes exceedingly inaccurate, and betrays a carcleffnefs, which, on fuch fubjects efpecially, ought to be induftrioutly avoided. Thus he lays (p. 291), that men have always diftinguifhed, in their expreffions and therefore in their their thoughts between mere event or caufation and activity;" and again (p. 303) "between events and the operations of active beings." Event and caufation are not, furely, words of the fame import, nor events and operations. We have always confidered an event as, in reality, an effect, but never as an efficient caufe; and though we think that all events proceed ultimately, and many of them immediately, from the opera-" tion of active beings, we do not confider the event as the operation itfelf, but as the effect or refult of the operation: When Mr. Scott is writing, the letters which he, forms are" events produced immediately by his pen, which, as it is ef fential fential to the operation of writing, may be confidered as the phyfical or mechanical caufe of thofe events; but furely the effects of that phyfical cause must be referred ultimately to Mr. Scott himself as their only efficient cause. On the whole, we do not think that by this work much has been added to the public stock of fcience; or that it will meet with the approbation, to which the author's former publication was unqueftionably entitled. ART. VI. Grounds of Union between the Churches of England and of Rome confidered, in a Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocefe of Durham, at the Ordinary Vifitation of that Diocefe, in the Year 1810. By Shute, Bifhop of Durham. 4to. 18 pp. Payne. 1811. ONCE more has this good and venerable prelate zealously and affectionately exerted himfelf in the difcharge of his high functions, and it becomes us, in the ftricteft regard to juice to affirm with unabated energy and vigour. The great characteristics of the Bifhop's former productions of this kind, were a pleafing elegance of compofition, and a clofe adherence to his fubject, fuch alfo are the features which diflinguifh the prefent charge. His Lordthip thus immediately and impreffively enters upon his fubject: "I have not entered on the folemnities of this day, without a deep fenfe of the merciful indulgence with which a gracious Providence has enabled me, by an unexpected continuance of life and health, to meet you once more after an interval of four years. "The boundaries of life are now indeed clofing fast upon me, and circumfcribe my views in this world to a space much fhort of another return of this day. But God's 'will be done. May he give us grace to improve this opportunity of communication. and conference to our mutual benefit! "I fhall not on this occafion enlarge on any of thofe topics, which were fubjects of my last charge (that I have done in another way, and I have the fatisfaction of thinking it has not been done in vain); nor fhall I deem it incumbent upon me to repel the infidious mifreprefentation of the feveral fubjects, as if the great questions which feparated the Church of England from the Church of Rome, were now at iffue; and of my fentiments refpecting the Romish Church, as if they were peculiar to my self, and had not been the unvaried fentiments of the Church of England fince the days of the Reformation. The events which have taken place in the courfe of the laft four years, efpecially, the L 3 Addreffes Addreffes poured into the office of the Secretary of State from all parts of Great Britain' on one occafion, and the late decifion in both Houfes of Parliament on the Roman Catholic claims, abundantly fhew, the indifpofition of the minds of the British nation,' (I quote the words of a learned and candid Roman Catholic,) refpecting thofe claims as connected with the Laws of England. On the Laws of England we may, I truft, fafely depend for the protection of our national faith, and ecclefiaftical eftablishment. But, for the continuance of this protection we can have no fecurity, if the people, or their reprefentatives, were ever to become indifferent to the importance of religious opinions. Such indifference would foon draw after it indifference to the truth even of the most effential doctrines of religion. And thus the caufe of Chriftianity, and of the Church establishment, becomes united iu the duties of a Proteftant Minifter, a Minister of the Church of England. Yet the advocates of Popery would perfuade you that you have fulfilled your duty in inculcating the obligations of the moral law; that you fhould confine your felves to the reproof of offences between man and man; that I defert my province when I exhort you to the defence of religious truth; and that when I direct your attention to the errors of the Church of Rome, I am raifing the standard of perfecution, not only against the opinions of Papifts, but against their perfons. How they could, with the fmalleft pretence to candour or to truth, charge my former Addrefs to you with uncharitable hoftility, I am at a lofs to discover, after the strictest scrutiny of iny language on that occafion. Such hotility was certainly contrary to my own feelings, and to my exprefs advice to you. "But while we difclaim all want of charity to the perfons of those, who differ from us, let it never be forgotten, that fidelity to our own principles compels us to regard fome of the doctrines of the Romish Church, as involving habits of Sacrilege, Blafphemy and Idolatry. And furely doctrines which lead to fuch habits, cannot be matter of indifference; the grounds, on which the two Churches are divided, cannot be inconfiderable; nor the duty which attaches to you in confequence, be trivial and unimportant." P. 1. The Bishop then proceeds to urge upon his clergy the neceffity of preferving among their different congregations the greater objects of Christianity which divide our Church from Papifts, as well as from Diffenters of every denomination; and it is particularly infifted upon, that the facrifice once made by Chrift himself was a "full, perfect, and suffcient facrifice for the fins of the whole world." Surely it is plain to demonftration, that this great doctrine of our Church rells on the eternal and immutable foundation of the Scrip ture, |