76 The Course of Nature. [January, 
causes of things, or to the intelligent but invisible sub- 
stratum which underlies the whole cause of nature, we 
should have no occasion to discuss them, because they 
would lie outside the field I have assigned as that of our 
contemplation at the present time, and which I have sought 
to describe as the field of phenomena. The doctrines that all 
things go on in exaCt accordance with the will of the Creator; 
that he has certain ends which the laws of nature are de- 
signed to bring about ; and that an intelligent cause lies 
behind the whole universe of phenomena, are of a class 
which science has no occasion whatever to dispute. If it 
were made clearly to appear that the field of the teachings 
in question was thus limited, and was entirely distinct from 
that of phenomena, with which alone science is occupied, 
there would be no occasion for dispute between the two 
schools. I have no disposition to throw a single stone 
across what I consider the sacred boundary line, nor to 
enter a field which I am by natural and acquired habits of 
thought unfitted to cultivate. As men of science let us by 
no means attempt to penetrate a region in which the eye of 
science can see nothing but darkness. If we thus subject 
ourselves to the imputation of being “ of the earth, earth)',” 
we may console ourselves that our edifice is firm and durable 
because it does not seek to rise into regions of serener air, 
nor to rear its dome above the clouds. 
I can hardly be mistaken in saying that the objections to 
the mechanical theory of nature, which I have just tried to 
formulate, are not always confined to the field of inscrutable 
first causes. There is a part of the boundary line over 
which the stones are flying very thickly. While some of 
the combatants may profess to make no attack on the 
dodtrine of the uniformity of natural law, I cannot but think 
that these professions often arise from a misapprehension of 
the scientific side of the question. Indeed, I must confess 
that I have met with a difficulty from my inability to form 
a clear idea of the views really entertained by the school 
now under consideration. I have made a somewhat careful 
study of some of the most elaborate works of the writers of 
the theological school, devoted to this very topic, and I have 
left them without being able to decide in my own mind 
whether the writers do or do not hold unreservedly to the 
mechanical theory of the course of nature. That nearly all 
intelligent men really believe in this theory, at least so far 
as the present time and dispensation are concerned, we have 
abundant reason for believing. Nor is there even among 
advanced theologians any lack of profession of a belief in the 
