be called respect which can co-exist with lukewarm homage, not to say wilful rebellion.

My years oblige me to admit, that your experience among men must very far exceed mine; besides, the state of men's minds forms an enquiry which I should be willing here to leave undetermined, did not your own statements go to shew that men rather disregard than doubt the common Natural Theology,-that they are rather negligent than ignorant of it, as I believe, much to their blame and prejudice. You have "often" made the "observation"* "that scientific men were apt to regard the study of Natural Religion as little connected with philosophical pursuits. Many of the persons to whom you allude were men of religious habits of thinking; others were free from any disposition towards scepticism, rather because they had not much discussed the subject, than because they had formed fixed opinions upon it after enquiry. But the bulk of them relied little upon Natural Theology, which they seemed to regard as a speculation built rather on fancy than on argument; or, at any rate, as a kind of knowledge quite different from either physical or moral science." A later remark of yours, which modifies the preceding one, seems to represent men as learned enough in the knowledge of Natural Theology, if they were but wise enough to profit by

• "Discourse," p. 1.

their learning. "In truth, it is with Natural Religion as with many of the greatest blessings of our sublunary lot: they are so common, so habitually present to and enjoyed by us, that we become insensible of their value, and only estimate them aright when we lose them, or fancy them lost. Accustomed to handle the truths of Revelation in connexion with, and in addition to, those of Natural Theology, and never having experienced any state of mind in which we were without the latter, we forget how essential they are to the former. As we are wont to forget the existence of the air we constantly breathe, until put in mind of it by some violent change threatening suffocation, so it requires a violent fit of abstraction to figure to ourselves the state of our belief in Revelation, were the lights of natural religion withdrawn. The existence and attributes of a God are so familiarly proved by every thing around us, that we can hardly picture to ourselves the state of our belief in this great truth, if we only knew it by the testimony borne to miracles," &c.*

I coincide with you in the admission, that some Natural Theology is general in the world; and I sincerely desire that it were better.

My own opinion is, that in our own country, few men are wicked enough totally to deny the existence

Discourse," p. 211.

or goodness of God, and that most men grant in addition their own sinfulness. I hold, however, that the just and profitable conviction of these essential truths is very commonly defective, especially among men of science. I shall endeavour to apply my remarks, as comprehensively as may be, to those points in which the prevalent feeling is defective; and I shall not scruple to call directly on yourself, wherever I see fair reason to consider you opposed to the spirit of a better guide than the vaunted inductive philosophy.

It is not that I cannot take pleasure in the history of Nature, for I might even boast of having new things to offer in elucidation of the Divine contrivances; it is not from any disinclination to a reflective morality, for the knowledge derived from enquiry of this kind may be both profitable to the investigator, and available in his influence; nor, is it out of any disrespect for the speculative psychologist, to whom I own myself, and I believe the world, to be indebted ; but, my objection is the following one, and heartily do I wish that all men, especially all thinking men, would well consider it.

My very grave objection is, that when the study of Nature, whether of matter, life, or mind, raises man to the contemplation of the Great Creator, however pure the sentiments of the creature may seem, however fine and exalted he may suppose them to be, he

is, nevertheless, in a miserable mistake: all his learning is in vain, until the knowledge of the Goodness and the Holiness of God convicts him of his own baseness in the sight of Him who is "of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on iniquity.' He who has not learnt to feel and to lament his own sinfulness, must have but a very faint idea of the Divine perfections.

In your dexterous but heedless praise of Natural Theology, for the enjoyments† it affords, on account also of its being intimately connected with our 'highest destinies," and "immediately and necessarily leading to the religious adoration of the Supreme Being,-can we doubt (you say)§ that the perpetually renewed proofs of his power, wisdom, and goodness, tend to fix and transport the mind, by the constant nourishment thus afforded to feelings of pure and rational devotion?" "The delight is renewed at each step of our progress, though, as far as evidence is concerned, we have long ago had proof enough. But that (you observe) is no more a reason for ceasing to contemplate the subject in its perpetually renovated and varied forms, than it would be a reason for resting satisfied with once seeing a long lost friend, that his existence had been sufficiently

proved by one interview."* Now, without stopping to look too closely into this last simile, let us suppose it to be made by a hundred men of different characters, and then let us enquire if it would not be more becoming in all of them to pass on from the review of the Almighty perfections to the investigation of themselves? Or, is the point up to which you have brought the student the very final one of Natural Theology? What would even a mere rational religion suggest? Let the "long lost friend" be rather an absent father restored; would he not say, "My son, hast thou been mindful of me? Hast thou diligently endeavoured to learn and to do my will? And, hast thou been ever careful to teach and assist thy brother? Shew me in what thou art improved, and how thou hast benefited thy fellows. What is become of the talents I gave

thee?"

The son who is perfectly satisfied with himself is not likely to entertain much true reverence even for his earthly parent;† while he that feels his father's elevated worth, will be painfully affected with the recollection of his own errors, negligences, and disobedience. Let now the "long lost friend" be a once

The thinking himself good is evidence that his moral standard is a low one. The more the goodness of the father exceeds that of the son, so much the more shameful is the son's self-satisfaction. The clearer his knowledge of good things, the higher his standard of right, the more certain and forcible will be his consciousness of his own deficiency.