19 



unfortunate in adducing these Christian Mys- 

 tics, " as holding no unintelligible articles of 

 faith." p. 43, note. 



Though you are so unwilling to allow of any 

 mysteries relating to " immaterial agencies,' 1 

 yet you find no difficulty in the admission of 

 the most unintelligible jargon, as explanatory 

 of the existing phenomena of nature. Thus to 

 account for the existence of certain parts, par- 

 ticularly in some marsupial animals, where the 

 function does not exist, or where the parts are 

 not employed, you recur to the ideal fancy* of 

 ja " certain model or original type," which had 

 been fixed on as " the pattern" of these ana- 

 logous beings. Truly, Sir, these are something 

 like the " eternal forms" of the ancient meta- 

 physics, or the <c internal moulds" of Buffon, 

 or that " principle of order," which Paley has 

 so successfully ridiculed in his " Natural The- 

 " ology." But I am inclined to think that you 

 hold the writings of this author in no great re- 

 pute, since you endeavour to decry the value of 

 these physico-theological speculations, and to 

 withdraw the minds of your pupils from the 

 contemplation of final causes. f 



Now, when it is considered, that the writings 

 of these " short-sighted" physico-theologists 

 are of all others the best adapted to imbue the 

 minds of young men in your profession with 

 sentiments of love and veneration for the Author 



* P. 1, 49, and p. 94. f P- 51. 

 B 2 



