PHYSICO-THEOLOGICAL WRITINGS. 



157 



not spring up, a drop of rain cannot fall, a ray of 

 Jtght cannot be emitted from the sun, nor a parti 

 cle of salt be united, with a never-failing sympa 

 thy to its fellow, without him ; every secondary 

 cause we discover, is but a new proof of the 

 necessity we are under of ultimately recurring 

 to him, as the one primary cause of every thing.&quot; 

 Illustrations of the position for which we are 

 now contending will be found in such works as 

 the following : Ray s &quot; Wisdom of God in the 

 Creation,&quot; Boyle s &quot; Philosophical and Theo- 

 losical works,&quot; Derham s Astro and Physico- 

 Theolowy,&quot;* Nieuwenty t s Religious Philoso 

 pher,&quot; Le Pluche s &quot; Nature Displayed,&quot; 

 Baxter s &quot; Matho,&quot; or the principles of natural 

 religion deduced from the phenomena of the ma 

 terial world, Lessor s Insecto-Theology, or a 

 demonstration of the Being and Attributes of 

 God, from the structure and economy of insects, 

 with notes by Lyonet, Bonnet s &quot; Contempla 

 tion of Nature,&quot; Euler s &quot; Letters to a German 

 Princess,&quot; translated by Hunter, Pierre s 

 &quot; Studies of Nature,&quot; &quot; Paley s Natural The 

 ology, Adam s &quot; Lectures on Natural Philoso 

 phy,&quot; Parkes &quot; Chemical Catechism,&quot; and 

 several others. The chief ooject of Ray is to 

 illustrate the wisdom of the Deity in the figure 

 and construction of the earth, in the structure and 

 symmetry of the human frame, and in the econo 

 my of the animal and vegetable tribes. The ob 

 ject of Derham, in his Astro-Theology, is to dis 

 play the wisdom and omnipotence of Deity, as 

 they appear in the structure, arrangement, and 

 motions of the heavenly bodies ; and his Physico- 

 Theology, a work of much greater extent, demon 

 strates the being and attributes of God from the 

 constitution of the earth and atmosphere, the 

 senses the structure, motions, respiration, food, 

 and habitations of animals the body of man 

 the economy of insects, reptiles, and fishes, and 

 the structure of vegetables. Though this excel 

 lent work is now considered as somewhat anti 

 quated, yet we have no modern work that can 

 fully supply its place. Paley s Natural Theolo 

 gy, however excellent in its kind, does not em 

 brace the same extensive range of objects. JViifU- 

 wentyt enters into a minute anatomical investi 

 gation of the structure of the human body, which 

 occupies the greater part of his first volume; and 

 in the two remaining volumes, illustrates the Di 

 vine perfections from a survey of the atmosphere, 

 meteors, water, earth, fire, birds, beasts, fishes, 

 plants, the physical and chemical laws of nature, 

 the inconceivable smallness of the particles of 

 matter, and the structure of the starry heavens. 



* An edition of Derham s Physico- Theology, in 

 two vols. Svo. (which is not very generally known) 

 was published in London in 1793, which contains 

 additioncd notes illustrative of modern discoveries, a 

 translation of the Greek and Latin quotations of the 

 original work, a life of the author, and sixteen cop 

 perplate engravings, illustrative of many curious 

 ubjects in the anima 1 and vegetable kingdoms. 



The voluminous work of Le Pluche compre 

 hends interesting descriptions of quadrupeds, 

 birds, fishes, insects, plants, flowers, gardens, 

 olive-yards, cornfields, woods, pasture-grounds, 

 rivers, mountains, seas, fossils, minerals, the at 

 mosphere, light, colours, vision, the heavenly 

 bodies, globes, telescopes, microscopes, the his 

 tory of navigation, systematic physics, &c. in 

 terspersed with a variety of beautiful reflections 

 on the Wisdom and Beneficence of the Deity in 

 the arrangements of nature. Euler^s Letters 

 comprehend popular descriptions of the most in 

 teresting subjects connected with natural philo 

 sophy and ethics, interspersed with moral reflec 

 tions, and frequent references to the truths of re 

 velation. Condorcet, in his French translation 

 of this work, carefully omitted almost all the pi 

 ous and moral reflections of this profound and 

 amiable Philosopher, as inconsistent wiih the in 

 fidel and atheistical philosophy which then pre 

 vailed. &quot; The retrenchments,&quot; says he &quot; affcct 

 reflections which relate less to the sciences and 

 philosophy, than to theology, and frequently even 

 to the peculiar doctrines of that ecclesiastical 

 communion in which Euler lived. It is unne 

 cessary to assign a reason for omissions of this de 

 scription.&quot; These omissions were supplied, and 

 the passages alluded to restored, by Dr. Hunter, 

 in his English translation, but they have been 

 again suppressed in the late edition, published in 

 Edinburgh, in two volumes, 12mo.* 



It is much to be regretted, that we have no 

 modern Rays, Derhams, Boyles, or Nieuwen- 

 tyts, to make the light of our recent discoveries 

 in science bear upon the illustration of the 

 perfections of the Deity, and the arrangements 

 of his providence. Since the period when those 

 Christian philosophers left our world, many of 

 the sciences which they were instrumental in 

 promoting, have advanced to a high degree of 

 perfection, and have thrown additional light on 

 the wisdom and intelligence of the Divine mind, 



As a specimen of the omissions to which we al 

 lude, the following passage may. suffice . &quot; But the 

 eye which the Creator has formed, is subject to no 

 one of all the imperfections under which t;he imagi 

 nary construction of the freethinker labours. In 

 this we discover the true reason why infinite wisdom 

 has employed several transparent substances in the 

 formation of the eye. It is thereby secured against 

 all thedefects which characterize every work of man. 

 What a noble subject of contemplation ! How perti 

 nent that question of the Psalmist ! He who formed 

 the eye, shall lie not sue ? and He who planted the car, 

 shall hf, not hear ? The eye alone being a master 

 piece that far transcends the human understanding, 

 what an exalted idea must we form of Him who has 

 bestowed this wonderful gift, and that in the highest 

 perfection, not on man only, but on the brute crea 

 tion, nay. on the vilest of insects !&quot; The French 

 philosopher and statesman seems to feel ashamed of 

 the least alliance between philosophy and religion, 

 when he is induced to discard such reflections. He 

 seems apprehensive, as Dr. Hunter rcmarks, that a 

 single drop of water from Scripture would contami 

 nate the whole mass of philosophy. We would hope 

 our British philosophers are not yet so deeply tino 

 turedwith the spirit of infidelity. 



