72 STUDIES OF NATURE. 



litical contrivance to keep them in order. Our 

 Philofophers, ftate in oppofition to it, the philofo- 

 phy of Socrates, of EpiSîeîiiSy of Marcus- Aurelhis ; as 

 if the morahty of thofe fages were lefs ayftere than 

 that of Jesus Christ; and as if the benefits to 

 be expeded from it were better fecured than thofe 

 of the Gofpel ! What profound knowledge of the 

 heart of man ; what wonderful adaptation to his 

 necefiities ; what delicate touches of fenfibility, are 

 treafured up in that divine Book ! I leave it's myf- 

 teries out of the queftion. Part of them, we are 

 told, have been taken from Plato. But Plato him- 

 felf borrowed them from Egypt, into which he 

 had travelled j and the Egyptians were indebted 

 for them, as we are, to the Patriarchs. Thefe 

 myderies, after all, are not more incomprehenfible 

 than thofe of Nature, and than that of our own 

 exiftence. Befides, in our examination of them, 

 we inadvertently miflead ourfelves. We want to 

 penetrate to their fource, and we are capable only 

 of perceiving their elfe(5ts. Every fupernatural 

 caufe is equally impenetrable to man. Man him- 

 felf is only an efFecl, only a refult, only a combi- 

 nation for a moment. Pie is incapable of judging 

 of divine things according to their nature ; his 

 judgment of them muft be formed according to 

 his own nature, and from the correipondence 

 which they have to his neceffities. 



If 



