SPECIAL ENDS IN CBEATION. 539 



of the Cosmological argument to prove that there is a God ; but no 

 good end is ever served by the concealment of truth. We apprehend 

 that it would be doing a serious injury to Natural Theology to at- 

 tempt to maintain the ground, that the Divine existence can be 

 proved — in the proper sense of the term — either from the special 

 adaptations, or from the order, of the universe. Cosmology has its 

 use : which is, however, to enlarge our conceptions of God, rather 

 than to prove that there is a G-od. Details like those contained in 

 the work before us, are invaluable, as illustrating the perfections of 

 the Creator, and leading our minds to a lively apprehension of His 

 universal presence, and of His wise and powerful and beneficent 

 agency ; but it is impossible that they can be felt to hare much 

 apologetic weight, where a question as to the Divine existence is 

 seriously raised ; and Natural Theology — especially considering the 

 assaults to which it is in the present age exposed — will not be effi- 

 ciently defended, till this is thoroughly understood. It is high time 

 for those who aspire to grapple scientifically with the mighty problem of 

 the Divine existence, to seek something more than a popular solution 

 of it : yea, to seek what must of necessity be an unpopular solution of 

 it. Pantheism is now making its influence more decidedly felt than 

 ever ; and against its deadly errors, we must have other aid than a 

 continuation of Paley, and other champions than Burnet Prize 

 Essayists. 



While persuaded that the doctrine of the Divine existence has the 

 warrant of scientific, no less than of religious certainty, we are con- 

 vinced, at the same time, that this can be made to appear, only as the 

 result of lengthened and profound metaphysical investigation. 

 Par be it from us to insinuate that the simple faith of the great 

 mass of Christians, who believe in God, while yet they are utter 

 strangers to Metaphysics, is not well founded. We hold on the con- 

 trary, that their faith is warrantable, — scientifically so, — though they 

 themselves are unable to explain precisely what its warrant is. The 

 common belief suffers injustice, not from us, but from those who speak 

 as though Cosmology were its sole, or main foundation ; and who — 

 when they cannot altogether shut their eyes to the fact that a proof 

 resting upon such a basis must needs be defective in the most essen- 

 tial points — endeavor to buttress up their feeble case by insisting that 

 the conviction of the Divine existence which may be obtained from 

 Cosmology has at least as much in its favor as the beliefs upon which 

 the ordinary business of life proceeds, and is amply sufficient for prac- 

 tical purposes. For our part, we protest against the supposition that 

 the faith which maukind at large have in an infinite, self-existent Be- 



