VIEWS OF OPPONENTS. 125 



and its Author in one or other of these lights. To 

 he prepared for a decision upon this question, it is 

 proper that the reader should be presented with 

 a sketch of the theory opposed to that of universal 

 order. 



WTien we set about describing this system, we 

 are struck by finding it vague and unsteady, vary- 

 ing with every degree of intelligence in its votaries 

 and ever}- addition made to science. The unedu- 

 cated man regards the whole system of the world 

 as resulting from, and depending upon, the imme- 

 diate working and guidance of an almighty being 

 who acts in each case as may seem to him most 

 meet, exactly as human creatures do. Persons of 

 intelligence, again, usually admit a system of 

 general laws, but for the most part entertain it 

 under great reservations, or in connexion with views 

 totally inconsistent with it. We find Dr. Samuel 

 Clark, for instance, admitting a course of nature as 

 the " will of God producing certain effects in a 

 regular and uniform manner," but, this will, " be- 

 ing arbitrary, [an assumption, as far as natural 

 means of knowledge are concerned,] is, he says, as 

 easy to be altered at any time as to be preserved!''' 



Others cut off particular provinces of nature 

 as exceptions from the plan of constant order. 



