Would that this were a common sight; then might we see the learned of the earth devotedly seeking the Will of their Maker-the universal propagation of the Gospel-the command to repent and seek Redemption in the knowledge and love of the "Word"-the Wisdom and the Will of the God of all Goodness.

You scarcely anticipate an answer, when you demand, "What delight can be more elevating, more truly worthy of a rational creature's enjoyment, than to feel, wherever we tread the paths of scientific enquiry, new evidence springing up around our footsteps -new traces of divine intelligence and power meeting our eye!"* Yet, if there is anything unjust in the sentiment of delight which you describe, nothing can be much more unworthy, even although no place can be found for conscious self-reproach; and, if there is not a profound sense of sinfulness in the reasoner when he contemplates his Maker's Perfections, so far from having cause to feel elevated, I would tell him that he sins in pride and blindness, and that he is only augmenting his errors, fortifying himself in them, and increasing the necessity for humiliation and repentance.

The more elevating delight-the more reasonable and more Christian delight, which I shall · venture to point out, is, I think, something better; I presume not to say it is the best. The rational crea

* "Discourse," p. 196.

E

ture must indeed learn to regard his Creator with deep reverence; yet it is not only consistent, but essential, that he should first feel how very far he is from what he ought to be, ere his almost impure praise can be acceptable to the God of Righteousness. -Has he always had the heart to follow after the wisdom, purity, and mercy of his Maker? No. Is he not both negligent and ignorant of the right, and does he not still cling to many things he knows to be evil? Yes. Will he still add to his innumerable sins an obdurate self-justification? Let the Christian ever combine heartfelt repentance with his reverence towards God; and then shall he know Peace, then shall he understand of wisdom, that "her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace."* A just conviction of his own and the world's sin is the only key to explain the whole spirit of the Gospel. When the thought of eternity enters his mind, does the enquirer ask for justice, or does he pray for mercy? Mercy must be his sole reasonable hope; and the Bible only can teach him of this mercy, of which it will be his delight to learn.

The bare imagination of the purity of the Almighty should be dreadful to sinful man, and the doubtful hope of God's mercy should be a source of restless anxiety to him, until he has discovered the way of atonement.

Prov. iii. 17.

Now, the elevated delight and consummate enjoyment to which I would have all aspire, depend upon the adaptation of Christianity to the evils and wants of mankind. To believe in the wisdom and perfections of the doctrines of Jesus Christ, with pardon and encouragement, consolation and promises, so essential and so abundant for all, is to enjoy the peace of God which passeth all understanding."* To know well the ways of God's dealing with men, in order to bring them, through His Word and the experience of this life, to repentance, faith, and salvation, is something more; and to give one's heart to promote these holy ways of His Providence is probably most of all.

Must we think, that your exaggerated and almost exclusive applause of a wretchedly imperfect Natural Theology is insincere; or that you judged it unbecoming or inexpedient to avow more? To accuse you of insincerity might seem harsh; for it may well be, that you have been carried away with an ideal opinion, greatly erroneous, of something strikingly bright in ordinary sciences; and, with your known partiality for them, have been tempted to describe a dangerous delusion for a just reality.

"Revelation cannot be true, if Natural Religion is false." Here you should have explained, what is

Philip. iv. 7.

+ "Discourse," p. 204-5.

the Natural Religion to which you refer, and whose is the system on which so much depends. This is an important question. Possibly you employ the term to signify those principles which relate to the simple attributes of God, and to the future existence of the soul; these form a part of Revelation itself, and cannot be true if the Bible is false. Revelation, again, cannot be true unless these principles, its essential parts, are also true. I think it is not well for you to feel, or to appear so confident in thus expressing yourself, and that you trust too much in your theological reasonings: for my own part, I doubt that it belongs in any way to Natural Theology to determine the Unity, the Omniscience, the Omnipotence, and the Eternal Existence of the Creator of Mankind; and I firmly believe that, independently of Revelation, these things are, for the present at least, totally above you, and all human wisdom. Again, whether our immortal souls be material or not, seems to me ever a vain enquiry.

If you include in your idea of an indispensable and fundamental Religion those doctrines of men which relate to the knowledge and choice of good and evil, to earthly probation and moral discipline, and to future rewards and punishments, I must avow, that I know of nothing deserving the name of Religion besides the doctrines of Our Lord Jesus. Christ; independent of which and the Old Testament, you can find nothing which satisfactorily discrimi

nates between good and evil, as a foundation for the notion of discipline, or for the expectation of rewards and punishments—nothing, that can render the view of trial and progressive improvement, which is so obscure when apart from Christianity, either just, clear, or practically available to good.

Christians cannot but think that your notions of Christianity are still very incomplete. They believe that the Bible introduces new virtues, and expunges some that were supposed true; also that it establishes the just value of all;* that it, and it alone, shews the right distinction of good and evil; and, not only that all pagan theories are erroneous, but that scarcely any other book, even of modern times, can be fully trusted.+

* See the justly valued opinions of Soame Jenyns. ("A view of the Internal Evidences of the Christian Religion.") These virtues are unhappily still new or unknown, or little valued in the world.

The Christian world does not think, for instance, as it is taught in the "Discourse," that Anger is a blessing, but that it is a sin; nor does it agree with your doctrine, that one man's ingratitude is justification for another's anger, and that anger is the right remedy for mortification. It would be a very novel thing for a Christian to praise God for such a gift as the capability of being angry. The Christian sets penitence and gratitude towards God high, but gratitude and mere worldly services between men, seem far less estimable in the Gospel. It is our duty to yield them, but it is by no means so well to covet them for ourselves. The "Discourse" (page 65,) introduces likewise the "healing influence" upon the mind, arising from a man's indulgence in "contempt or even pity:" the Holiness of the Bible sanctions not, but condemns even the pity that is allied to contempt. "He that despiseth his neighbour sinneth." (Prov. xiv. 21.) "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (Matt. xix. 19.) "Love" and