675 
1880.J “ On the Unity of Nature:' 
confusion of our enemies, have all been obtained through their 
means, and contrary to what would have happened but for 
our prayers. But every such event is in fadt a miracle,— a 
breach in the uniformity of Nature’s law. This is a bare 
statement of fadts which will be admitted by all, whatever 
may be their views otherwise with regard to prayer a 
subject which does not concern us here. 
No people are supposed to have been more firm in their 
monotheistic belief than the Jews, yet. their whole lives 
were spent in such an atmosphere of miracles as it would 
hardly be possible for us now to realise. 
It could easily be shown that ancient Pagans and modern 
Savages, just like ourselves, have regarded the universe 
solely from a personal point of view, and in adualistic sense 
as it affedted their joys or sorrows, without any thought 
whatever of a great law of uniformity. 
If, notwithstanding such general beliefs with regard to 
the system of the universe, wholly erroneous as we now 
know them to be, without any knowledge whatever of those 
generalisations we call laws of Nature, such as are given by 
the author as evidence of its unity, and believing, , more- 
over, that the ordinary course of Nature was continually 
being set aside, at one time by its Author, at another by his 
opponent, mankind still believed in the Unity of Nature, 
it would be a most marvellous and unaccountable circum- 
stance, and would require much stronger evidence in support 
of it than merely calling it an “ intuition of the mind,”— a 
most convenient psychological Cave of Adullam for the 
reception of all real or supposed mental phenomena which 
will not fit in anywhere else. 
Theology is in the habit of twitting Science by saying 
“ You admit there was a beginning to the universe; 
that of itself is a miracle; but if you believe in one, why 
not in others.” Science knows nothing of the matter, and 
postulates nothing. Theology dogmatically affirms that the 
universe will have no end ; suppose Science were to affirm, 
equally dogmatically, that it had no beginning ? The one 
assertion is just as incomprehensible and unprovable as the 
other; but the modesty of Science is shown in admitting 
its ignorance, and its honesty and love of truth in not pre- 
dicating anything under the circumstances. 
The great mistake made by the author, as by many 
others, is in supposing that Theology has anything to gain 
from Science, or Science from Theology. Abraham was a 
sound theologian, with no more knowledge of Science than 
any other Bedouin of the Desert ; and there have been 
