compared, in their Essential Nature, Theoretic Grounds, and Practical Influence;" Edinburgh, 1855. He argues with the Atheists as if they were thinking beings, possibly lovers of truth; and in contending with other classes of men to whose opinions he is more or less opposed, he writes with a like degree of candour and moderation. Though myself so unfortunate as to be one of the objects of his hostile criticism (see Appendix, No. IX.), I have read with pleasure several passages in which the study of the laws of nature is strongly recommended by him. "It is not true," says he, "that there is any real or necessary antagonism between the laws of nature and the prerogatives of God; on the contrary, let our knowledge advance, until all the phenomena both of the Material and Moral worlds shall be reduced under so many general laws, even then Superstition might disappear, but Theology would remain, and would only receive fresh accessions of evidence and strength, in proportion as the wise order of nature is more fully unfolded, and its most hidden mysteries disclosed.” (Vol. I., p. 485.) Again: "On the ground of analogy, we think it highly probable that every department of nature is subject to regular and stable laws; and on the same ground we may anticipate that, in the progressive advance of human knowledge, many new fields will yet be conquered, and added to the domain of Science." (Vol. II., p. 194.) In regard to Phrenology, he admits that it no more leads to materialism than do similar facts which everybody recognises (vol. II., pp. 73, 90-93); and that "the mere proof of the soul's being an immaterial substance would not necessarily infer its being also immortal." (Vol. II., p. 121.) To prevent misunderstanding, I beg here to explain the meaning which is attached in the following work to the expressions," Laws of Nature" and "Natural Laws." Every object and being in nature has received a definite constitution, and also powers of acting on other objects and beings. The action of the forces is so regular, that we describe them as operating under laws imposed on them by God; but these words indicate merely our perception of the regularity of the action. It is impossible for man to alter or break a natural law, when understood in this sense; for the action of the forces and the effects they produce are placed beyond his control. But the observation of the action of the forces leads man to draw rules from it for the regulation of his own conduct, and these rules are called natural laws, because Nature dictates or prescribes them as guides to conduct. If we fail to attend to the operations of the natural forces, we may unknowingly act in opposition to them; but as the action is inherent in the things, and does not vary with our state of knowledge, we must suffer from our ignorance and inattention. Or we may know the forces and the consequences which their action inevitably produces, but from ignorance that through them God is dictating to us rules of conduct; or from mistaken notions of duty, from passion, self-conceit, or other causes, we may disregard them, and act in opposition to them but the consequences will not be altered to suit our ignorant errors or humours; we must obey or suffer. Further explanations on this subject are given on pages 97 and 208 of the present work. It is proper also to mention that many passages and ideas that have already appeared in my other works are here reproduced, not as new truths, but as the foundations of a new application of them. Only two alternatives were presented to me; either to refer the reader to these passages scattered over several works (which would have broken all continuity of argument), or to reproduce them; and I have adopted the latter as the more convenient course for the reader. Finally-The same propositions are frequently repeated in the different chapters of this work, and I wish to explain that this has been done intentionally; because my object has been, if possible, to break up some old religious associations, in order to facilitate the introduction of new ideas; and it appeared to me that a single cold announcement of the new suggestions, however clear and logical, would have little effect in accomplishing this end. ON THE RELATION BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION. CHAPTER I. ON THE PRESENT STATE OF THE RELATION BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION. THE Reformation in the sixteenth century produced a powerful effect on the European mind. The miracles, precepts, and sublime devotional effusions of the Old and New Testaments, excited, with deep intensity, the religious sentiments of the people, and introduced ardent discussions on temporal and eternal interests, which, unfortunately, were followed by furious and desolating wars. Freedom on earth, and salvation in heaven or perdition in hell, were the mighty topics which then engaged public attention. In the beginning of the seventeenth century, a generation born and educated under these exciting influences, appeared upon the stage. The Reformation was then consummated, but the duty remained of acting it out in deeds. The new generation had read in the Books of the Old Testament of a people whose king was God; whose national councils were guided by omniscience, and whose enterprises, whether in peace or war, were aided and accomplished by omnipotence employing means altogether apart from the ordinary course of nature. The New Testament presented records of a continued exercise of similar supernatural powers; and the great lesson taught in both seemed to that generation to be, that the power of God was exercised as a shield to protect, and an irresistible influence to lead to success and victory in secular affairs, those who believed and worshipped aright, who embraced cordially the doctrines revealed in the sacred volumes, who abjured all self-righteousness and self-reliance, and who threw themselves in perfect confidence and humility on Him as their King, protector, and avenger. A In the first half of the seventeenth century, the active members of society in England and Scotland embraced these views as principles not only of faith but of practice. With that profound earnestness of purpose which is inspired by sincere conviction of religious truth, they desired to realize in deeds what they professed as faith. As remarked by Thomas Carlyle, that generation "attempted to bring the Divine law of the Bible into actual practice in men's affairs on the earth.” In the contests between Cromwell and the Covenanters, we observe both parties claiming to be "the people of God;" both asserting that they were directed by Divine influence, and supported by Divine power, even when in hostile collision with each other. It is necessary only to read attentively Cromwell's letters and speeches, and the contemporary narratives of the Covenanters, to be satisfied of this fact. Each party ascribed its successes to the Divine approval of its conduct and belief, and its calamities to displeasure with its unbelief or other sins. When Cromwell overthrew the Scotch, and "had the execution of them," in other words, the slaughter of them, for many miles in the pursuit, he called it "a sweet mercy," vouchsafed to him by God, to whom he devoutly ascribed the glory. After mentioning his victory at Dunbar, the trophies of which were about three thousand Scotch slain," near ten thousand prisoners," "the whole baggage and train taken," with "all their artillery, great and small," he adds, "It is easy to see the Lord hath done this. It would do you good to see and hear our poor foot to go up and down making their boast of God."* The Covenanters held the same belief; but, somewhat inconsistently, while they confessed that their own religious unworthiness had brought upon them the Divine displeasure, they denied to Cromwell the right to interpret the victory as a manifestation of the Divine approval of his faith, principles, and practice-They endeavoured to represent it as merely an event" for which Cromwell rebukes them in the following words" You (the men of the Covenant) say that you have not so learned Christ as to hang the equity of your cause upon events.' We (for our part) could wish that blindness had not been cast upon your eyes to all those marvellous dispensations which God hath lately wrought in England. But did you not solemnly appeal (to God) and pray? Did not we do so too? And ought not you and we to think, with fear and trembling, of the hand of the great God in this mighty and strange appearance of His, instead of slightly * Letter XCII., Cromwell to Lenthal, dated "Dunbar, 4th September 1650." (Carlyle's Cromwell, vol. ii. p. 41.) |