188 



CHRISTIAN! T Y. 



the id of the Christian argument, it appears 85 crude 

 , and uuphilcMophical, at do the ingenious ipeculatu-ns 

 of the schoolmen, when set in nppotiiion to the rigour, 

 Bd evidence, and precision, which reign in every depart- 

 ment of modern icience. 



J 7 1. The application of Lord Bacon'* philosophy to the 

 study of extemal nature was a happy epoch in the his- 

 tory of physical icience. It is not long lincc this appli- 

 cation ha* been extended to the study of moral and in- 

 tellectual phenomena. All that we contend for is, that 

 our tubjecu ihould have the benefit of the same applica- 

 tion ; and we count it hard, while, in every other de- 

 partment of inquiry, a respect for truth is found suffi- 

 cient to repress the appetite for system-building ; that 

 theology, the loftiest and most inaccessible of all the 

 ciencrs, should still remain infected with a spirit so ex- 

 ploded, and so unplnlosophic.il ; and that the fancy, and 

 theory, and unsupported speculation, to current among 

 the P. IMS and demi-infidt-U of the day, should be held 

 paramount to the authority of facts, which have come 

 down to us with a weight of evidence and testimony, 

 that is quite unexampled in the history of ancient times'. 

 What is science, but a record of observed pheno- 

 mena, grouped together according to certain points of re- 

 semblance, which have been suggested by an actual atten- 

 tion to the phenomena themselves ? We never think of 

 questioning the existence of the phenomena, after we 

 have demonstrated the genuineness and authenticity of 

 the record. After this is demonstrated, the singular or 

 unexpected nature of the phenomena is not suffered to 

 weaken their credibility, a credibility which can only 

 be destroyed by the authority of our own personal ob- 

 servation, or some other record possessed of equal or su- 

 perior pretensions. But in none of the inductive scien- 

 ces is it in the power of a student to verify every thing 

 by his own personal observation. He must put up with 

 the observations of others, brought home to the convic- 

 tions of his own mhid by creditable testimony. In the 

 science of geology, this is eminently the case. In a 

 tcience of such extent, our principles must be in part 

 founded upon the observations of others, transmitted to 

 us from a distant country. And in a science, the pro- 

 n-sses of which are so lengthened in point of time, our 

 principles should also in part be founded on the observa- 

 tions of others, transmitted to us from a remote antiqui- 

 ty. Any observations of our own are so limited, both 

 in point of space and of time, that we never think of op- 

 poting their authority to the evidence which is laid be- 

 fore us. Our whole attention is directed to the validity 

 of the record ; and the moment that this validity is esta- 

 blished, we hold it incumbent upon us to submit our 

 minds to the entire and unmodified impression of the tes- 

 v contained in it. Now, all that we ask is, that 

 the lame process of investigation be observed in theolo- 

 gy, which is held to be so sound and so legitimate in 

 other science'. In a science of such extent, as to em- 

 brace the wide domain ot moral and intelligent nature, 

 ive feel the littleness of that range to which our own 

 personal observations are confined. We shall be glad, 

 not merely of the information transmitted to us from a 

 distant country, but of the authentic information trans- 

 mitted to us by any other order of beings, in some dis- 

 tant and unknown part of the creation. In a science, 

 too, which has for its object the lengthened processes of 

 the divine administration, we should like if any record 

 of past times could enable us to extend our observations 

 ii the limits of our own ephemeral experience ; 

 aod if there are any events of a former age possessed of 

 i peculiar and decisive character, as would help us 



to some Mtisfactory conclusion in this greatest and most C.l.- 

 interesting of the sciences. 'y. 



I"''. On a subject so much above us and beyond u, 

 we would never think of opposing any preconceptions 

 to the evidence of history. We would maintain the hu- 

 mility of the inductive ipirit. We would cast about 

 for facts, and events, and appearances. We would of- 

 fer our minds as a blank surface to every thing that 

 came to them, supported by unexceptionable evidence. 

 It is not upon the nature of the facts themselves, that 

 we would pronounce upon their credibility, but upon 

 the nature of that testimony by which they were sup- 

 ported. Our whole attention would be uirected to the 

 authority of the record. After this was established, xve 

 would surrender our whole understanding to its contents. 

 We would school down every antipathy within us, and 

 di-own it as a childish affection, unworthy of a philoso- 

 pher who professes to follow truth through all the dis- 

 gusts and discouragements which surround it. There are 

 men of splendid reputation in our enlightened circles, 

 who never attended to this speculation, and who annex 

 to the gospel of Christ nothing else than ideas of super- 

 stition and vulgarity. In braving their contempt, we 

 would feel ourselves in the best element for the display 

 and exercise of the philosophical temper. We would 

 rejoice in the omnipotence of truth, and anticipate, in 

 triumph, the victory which it must accomplish over the 

 pride of science and the fastidiousness of literature. 

 It would not be the enthusiasm of a visionary which 

 would support us, but the inward working of the very 

 same principle which sustained Galileo, when he adhered 

 to the result of his experiments, and Newton, whenj he 

 opposed his mea-urcments and observations to the tide 

 of prejudice he had to encounter from the prevailing 

 taste and philosophy of the times. 



171. We conceive, that inattention to the above prin- 

 ciples has led many of the most popular and respected 

 writers in the Deistical controversy to introduce a great 

 deal of discussion that is foreign to the merits of the 

 question altogether ; and in this way the attention is of- 

 ten turned away from the point in which the main strength 

 of the argument lies. An infidel, for example, objects 

 against one of the peculiar doctrines of Christianity. 

 To repel the objection, the Christian conceives it neces- 

 sary to vindicate the reasonableness of that doctrine, and 

 to shew how consistent it is with all those antecedent 

 conceptions which we derived from the light of natural 

 religion. All this we count superfluous. It is impo- 

 sing an unnecessary task upon ourselves. Enough for 

 us to have established the authority of the Christian re- 

 velation upon the ground of its historical evidence. AH 

 that remains is to submit our minds to the fair interpre- 

 tation of Scripture. Yes ; but how do you dispose of 

 the objection drawn from the light of natural religion ? 

 In precisely the same way that we would dispose of an 

 objection drawn from some speculative system, against 

 the truth of any physical fact that has been well esta- 

 blished by observation or testimony. We would disown 

 the system, and oppose the obstinacy of the fact to all 

 the elegance and ingenuity of the speculation. 



175. We are sensible that this is not enough to satis- 

 fy a numerous class of very sincere and well-disposed 

 Christians. There are many of this description, who, 

 antecedent to the study of the Christian revelation alto- 

 gether, repose a very strong confidence in the light of 

 natural religion, and think that, upon the mere strength 

 of its evidence, they can often pronounce with * consi- 

 derable degree of assurance on the character of thr di- 

 vine administration. To such as these something more 



