Page images

of infidel objections. Far otherwise That the evidence of natural religion is conclusive, enters as an element into the reasoning of his Discourses on the Modern Astronomy. He plainly takes it for granted, that nature affords sufficient evidence not only of the being and power of God, but of his wisdom and goodness. We read of seeing the evidences of Divine wis

dom and care spread in exhaustless profusion around us ;' of the principles of natural religion as - undeniable truths, lying

within the field of human observation ;' of its being a most - Christian exercise to extract a sentiment of piety from the

appearances of nature. The Author appeals to the per"sonal history of every individual,' for evidence of a particular providence; and he speaks of having experience of the government of God, of perceiving in the wisdom and goodness

around us that the thoughts of God are not as our thoughts, • nor bis ways as our ways;' of prints of design and benevo

lence in the scene' of nature, of microscopic objects filled and animated with evidences of the Divine glory, of 'impres

sive proofs' of the particular attention of God to the minutest of bis works.* le disposes of the infidel objection, not by saying that Christianity bas been proved to be true, not by opposing the obstinacy of the fact to the elegance of the

speculation, but by applying to it the analogy first illustrated by the profound and sagacious Butler.

This tried weapon, which Dr. C. bad degraded into a mere argumentum ud hominem, a fallacious mode of reasoning, is the instrument of his splendid victory. He readily believes in the mission of the Eternal Son of God for the salvation of the world, because it is no more than what he sees lying scattered, in numberless

examples before him, and running through the whole line of . bis recollections.'

To recommend his mode of defending Christianity, Dr. C. represented it as the application of the inductive pbilosophy to the Christian Evidence. This pbilosophy, if we may credit him, considers experience, not in the vague and popular, but in the rigorous and philosophic acceptation of thai term, as the only source of human knowledge. The light of experience being our only guide, as ‘we bave no experience whatever of the

invisible God, as we are precluded, by the nature of the subject, from the benefit of observation, our ignorance ought to restrain us from asserting that God exists,' and inuch more • from ascribing to him any attributes,' or bolding any certain conclusions, as to the character of the Divine administration.' Not to dwell on the palpable contradiction between this repre

[ocr errors]

*" A Series of Discourses on the Christian Revelation, viewed in conpection with the Modern Astronomy." pp. 8. 9. 21.106. 110. 113. 116. sentation and the sentences already adduced from the Discourses on the Modern Astrono!ny, it is not a little curious that the objection here stated, to the proof which nature pffords of the being of God, was obviated, when the proof was first exhibited in words, by the father of moral philosophy. “I see not,” said Aristodemus, “ the architects of what takes place here." Nor,” replied Socrates, “ do you see your mind, which dis

poses of your body*.”

If experience is the only source of human knowledge, it will be impossible to support Christianity by external evidence, because experience alone does not enable us to conceive of a cause, to ascertain the existence of our fellow creatures, as intellectual or moral beings, or to determine whether any credit is due to their testimony.

It is impossible to manage an inductive process by the light of experience merely; for, without an additional element, we cannot confido in the continuance of the laws of nature, or trace the connexion of effects with their physical causes. Dr. C. will readily allow, that the process by which he has shewn that the great masses of the universe are occupied with live ing, intelligent, and moral agents, is strictly inductive. But the first step of that induction cannot be taken, without combining with the results of experience, the principle that like appearances are to be ascribed to like causes. By experience alone we could not determine the bulk of the moon. The same principle by which we ascertain physical causes, induces us to believe in the existence of those that are eficient. If this belief is rejected, it involves us in contradiction and absurdity.

In stating experience to be our only guide in philosophical investigations, Dr. C. differs entirely from the father of the inductive logic, and the most illustrious of his disciples. Bacon, Newton, those who have most successfully cultivated the physical sciences, as well as those who bave applied the Baconian maxims to investigate the objects of our consciousness, thought it strictly philosophical, not only to infer the existence of efficient causes from physical effects, but to deduce from the character of the known effects, the peculiar attributes of their causes. may confide in our consciousness and our senses, if we may ascend from physical effects to efficient causes, and infer the character of such causes from the perception of ends and uses in their effects, the reasoning by which the conclusions of natural theology are deduced, and the internal evidence of Chris. tianity, will appear in perfect harmony with the purest principles of inductive science. The process, indeed, of resolving the

* Xenoph. Memor, Lib. I. cap. iv. sec. 6.

If we

celestial phenomena into a case of gravitation, is more circuitous and elaborate, but not more inductive or satisfactory, than that of resolving the varied and successive appearances of nature, into the agency of a perfect and eternal Mind. If by the supposition of universal gravitation, the celestial mechanism is explained, do we not, by supposing the being of a supreme and perfect luteliect, find an explanation equally satisfactory, of the innumerable traces of power, intelligence, and goodness, diffused over nature?

• Unless our faculties are radically deceptious, we have undoubted ground for concluding that a Deity exists-that certain qualities belong to the Divine character--and that certain general principles mark his administration. Thus combining together the natural evidences furnished by the sources above mentioned, we conclude with the fullest assurance, that one Supreme Intelligence has created and arranged all thnigs—that he presides over all—and that wisdom, justice, and benig, nity mark his character and administration.-Christianity offers itself to our acceptance, professing to be a revelation from heaven. It presents a new class of phenomena, exhibited in a written record, to which we attend as carefully as to those which are displayed to us in the book of nature. In this new field of investigation, we trace the same characteristic marks of the Divine Being, which we had previously ascertained. Comparing with our former conclusions, the general principles here declared to regulate the Divine procedure, we find them to correspond in every respect; what is obscure in the former, is illustrated by the latter; and their mutual harmony serves to verify both.' • The argument which establishes the previous presumption in favour of miracles, being grounded on the dignity of the end manifestly contemplated in the constitution of Christianity, proceeds on principles fully recognized by the inductive philosophy. Acknowledging the authority of primary laws of belief, uniformly regulating the procedure of the inductive philosopher, the full credibility of the testimony of the Christian witnesses is ascertained. And furnished with those antecedent conceptions of Deity, which natural theology establishes, or permitted to employ the internal evidence, we are able by a process of induction, equally simple and legitimate, to prove from miracles, in the most conclusive manner, the truth of Chris. tianity.' pp. 124, 125, 127, 128.

According to Dr. C. the heathen, in primitive times, were converted to Christianity solely by its external evidence. They

saw the miracles, they acquiesced in them as satisfying cre• dentials of an inspired; they took their own religion from bis • mouth. If this were the fact, it might still be inquired whether the process in those cases was the only legitimate mode of conviction, or the best possible in all circumstances. But the above statement is not substantiated by any evidence. That the internal evidence of Christianity was not exbibited, or that if exbibited, it was nugatory, remains to be shewn. In the dis

[ocr errors]

courses of the great Master of Christians, arguments will be found drawn from the principles of natural theology, as well as from the character and tendency of his doctrine. The Apostle Paul will be found to appeal to fact, to the reason and conscience of his readers, to the reasonableness of his doctrine, in short to principles of natural theology, in order to substantiate the truth of what he taught. As it would be impiety to suppose that our Lord, or his servant, the Apostle Paul, employed fallacious arguments to recommend their conclusions, it follows undepiably that Dr. C. was not a little rash in pouring contempt on modes of inculcating Christian truth, which have been consecrated by the founders of our religion.

For our own part we must say, that the internal evidence of Christianity appears to us to have been, in all ages, most efficacious in producing a salutary conviction of its Divine origin. In the first ages of the Church, the universal belief of demoniacal agency, impaired in a degree the force of the miraculous evidence. The great argument of the early apologists, is, the excellence of the Christian religion, compared, not only with the absurdities and abominations of idolatry, but with the most refined speculations of philosophy. From the great use of this argument, it is natural to infer that it was actually found most efficacious in making converts to the faith. Modern missionaries find the excellence of the Christian religion the most generally prevailing argument among the objects of their labours. In Christian countries, the faith of common Christians in the truth of their religion, rests mainly on its character and tendency. It is impossible, therefore, to view without extreme regret, any respectable Christian writer attempting to subvert the internal evidence of our faith. If the impress which God has inade on bis truth could be effaced, its place would be ill supplied by crude novelties.

The able work of which we have endeavoured to exhibit an outline, deserves to be attentively read by all Christians who wish to know the principles from which the evidences of religion derive their cogency:

It will teach those who may have rested their faith chiefly on the internal proofs of Revelation, that on the same principles, the miraculous evidence affords ground for confidence; while to those whose trust in the internal evidence of Christianity, or in the light of nature, may have been shaken by plausible sophisms, it will shew that they may most reasonably repose in both; and it will make all perceive that if the evidence of our faith should be subverted, it will involve in its ruia all practice and all speculation.

Art. II. Narrative of an Expedition to explore the River Zaire,

usually called the Congo, in South Africa, in 1816, under the Direction of Captain J. K. Tuckey, R. N.

(Concluded from p. 458.) VAR

ARIOUS cirumstances soon occurred, to indicate the dif

ference between the tract of the globe at which the observers had arrived, and that which they had left, to see no more; as for instance, the fresh traces, on the ground, of elephants and tigers, and, at one spot near the shore, human skulls and

other human bones, close to a place where had been a fire.' This last appearance, so much like a sign of cannibalism, was explained some days afterwards. _We were assured that they were the remains of criminals, who had suffered for the crime of poisoning, this spot being the place of execution of a certain district. When a common man is convicted of this crime, his head is first severed, and his body then burnt; but the punishment of a culprit of superior rank, is much more barbarous; the members being amputated one by one, so as to preserve life' [that is, for part of an hour] •and one of each sent to the principal towns of the kingdom. The trial is always by a kind of ordeal.'

They laboured up the side channels of the stream, almost constantly attended and incommoded by boarding parties of Mafooks and their filthy gangs, in quest of brandy, and exorbitant traffickers of a few of the products of the country. They were now also in the proximity of vessels employed in the slave-trade, one of which, under Spanish colours, is pronounced to have been English or American property. Considerable aların having been excited among these villains, by the appearance of the vessels of the expedition, the Captain very properly judged 'it his best policy to, cause to be circulated the most positive declarations, that as his commission had nothing to do in any way with the slave-trade, he should interfere with no one. Passing the great mass of granite called Fetiche rock, bearing a quantity of rude sculptures, and commanding the river by projecting from the one bank to within a mile and a half of the other, they approached at Embomma, a new stage of the river, in which it presents itself in the form of one undivided stream. Here a black man named Simmons, whom they bad on board, was recognised by bis father and o:ber relatives, after an absence of eleven years, and welcomed with transports of joy.

This history of this man adds one blot more to the character of European slave-traders. His father, who is called Mongova Seki, a prince of the blood, and counsellor to the king of Embomma, entrusted him, when eight or ten years old, to a Liverpool captain of the name of* to be educated, (or according to his expression to learn

* The name of such a miscreant ought not to have had the im•

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »