26 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 



to understand his word ; and the more practised we are 

 in his word, the more readily shall we discern his truth 

 in his works; for, proceeding from the same great Au- 

 thor, they must, when rightly interpreted, mutually ex- 

 plain and illustrate each other. 



Who then shall dare maintain, unless he has the har- 

 dihood to deny that God created them, that the study of 

 insects and their ways is trifling or unprofitable ? Were 

 they not arrayed in all their beauty, and surrounded with 

 all their wonders, and made so instrumental (as I shall 

 hereafter prove them to be) to our welfare, that we might 

 glorify and praise him for them ? Why were insects made 

 attractive, if not, as Ray well expresses it, that they might 

 ornament the universe and be delightful objects of con- 

 templation to man a ? And is it not clear, as Dr. Paley 

 has observed, that the production of beauty was as much 

 in the Creator's mind in painting a butterfly or in stud- 

 ding a beetle, as in giving symmetry to the human frame, 

 or graceful curves to its muscular covering 13 ? And shall 

 we think it beneath us to study what he hath not thought 

 it beneath him to adorn and place on this great theatre 

 of creation? Nay, shall we extol those to the skies who 

 bring together at a vast expense the most valuable speci- 

 mens of the arts, the paintings and statues of Italy and 

 Greece, all of which, however beautiful, as works of man, 



a " Quaeri fortasse a nonnullis potest, Quis Papilionum usus sit ? 

 Respondeo, Ad ornatum Universi, et ut hominibus spectaculo sint : 

 ad ruraillustrandavelut totbractese inservientes. Quis enim eximiam 

 earum pulchritudinem et varietatem contemplans mira voluptate non 

 afficiatur? Quis tot colorum et schematum elegantias naturae ipsius 

 ingenio excogitatas e^ artifici penicillo depictas curiosis oculis in- 

 tuens, divinae artis vestigia eis impressa non agnoscat et miretur ?" 

 Rai. Hist. Ins. 109. * Nat. Theol. 213. 



