at variance with Holy Writ. It can speak of the beauty and order of the universe, and of the evidence of design which meets us every where; it may suggest these and numberless other arguments derived from the mental powers themselves, in proof of the existence of a supreme Creator and Governor of the universe; and from thence proceed to the assertion of the soul's immateriality, and of the extreme probability of a future state of retribution. But this is giving to natural religion its utmost latitude. The sure and certain hope of everlasting life is made known to us by the light of the Gospel only; as doubtless is the mysterious truth that the Almighty God, whose " glory the heavens declare," and whose wondrous works are shown throughout all creation, is Tri-personal. Yet it is a truth of such infinite, such stupendous importance, that our salvation itself rests upon it. The whole scheme of human redemption rests upon it. We are wholly and exclusively indebted to the Redeemer's love for the Father's mercy, and to the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, for the means of grace whereby we are rendered capable of the unspeakable benefit thence accruing. Can we then be too much on our guard against any deductions of philosophy which may tend to put us off our guard either with respect to the Tri-personality of God, or the nonpersonality of the Godhead. Now, what says Lord Brougham? Not that all the proofs of a superintending Providence, to which the enunciations of

natural theology are confined, but that "all the proofs of the Deity's personality, that is, his individuality, his. unity; all the evidence which we have of his works, showing throughout not only that they proceeded from design, but that the design is of one distinctive kind— that they come from the hand not only of an intelligent being, but of a being whose intellect is specifically peculiar, and always of the same character; all these proofs are, in the most rigorous sense, inductive."Discourse of Nat. Theol. p. 80. In my former observations on the Athanasian Creed, I have said how surprising it is" that many great and good men have fallen into the error of speaking of the Triune God, as if he were One Person." "Surely, then," says Professor Sedgwick, "we may conclude with Paley, that the world around us proceeds from design and intelligence-intelligence properly and strictly so called, including, under that name, foresight, consideration, and reference to utility, and that after all the schemes of a reluctant philosophy, the necessary resort is to a Deity. The marks of design are too strong to be gotten over-design must have a designer-that designer must have been a Person—that Person is God."-Sedgwick's Disc. p. 116. 2d ed.

Thus we perceive, that Professor Sedgwick adopts Paley's words to express his own notion of the personality of the Deity.

*"Early Years and Late Reflections," p. 289.

Professor Turton's quotation from the 23d ch. of Paley's Nat. Theology, on the Personality of the Deity, begins thus "Contrivance, if established, appears to me to prove every thing that we wish to prove ; amongst other things, it proves the Personality of the Deity, as distinguished from what is sometimes called nature, sometimes called principle, which terms, in the mouths of those who use them philosophically, seem to be intended to admit and to express an efficacy, but to exclude and to deny a personal agent. Now that which can contrive, which can design, must be a person. These capacities constitute personality, for they imply consciousness and thought. They require that which can perceive an end or purpose, as well as the power of providing means, and of directing them to their end. They require a centre, in which perceptions unite, and from which volitions flow; which is mind; and in whatever a mind resides, is a person. The seat of intellect is a person."

How different, I have added in a note, is Professor Turton's own perspicuous statement of this matter!

“On an actual survey of external nature, we find things on all sides so related to each other, that the idea of adaptation and contrivance irresistibly forces itself upon the understanding. We feel that they could not exist in their present relations, unless it had been previously intended that they should so exist. Every

object, therefore, in the natural world, must have been foreseen, contrived, formed to be exactly as it is. Moreover, it is contrary to all our experience, that any thing should foresee and contrive, except mind — that is, an intelligent being, exercising volition and possessing power. In other words, we find ourselves surrounded by objects, none of which can we conceive have begun to exist, otherwise than by the agency of some intelligent and powerful being. And yet more, the various instances of adaptation and contrivance, have such a decided tendency to the completion of one grand plan; that we are led to the conclusion, that the entire scheme of nature must have originated with One supremely wise and powerful being-whom we call God."* Here we have the most satisfactory recognition of the essential unity, without the unipersonality, and we may therefore suppose that Professor Turton adopted Archdeacon Paley's words, in the foregoing quotation, inadvertently. Still such a supposition shows more clearly the insidious character of a heresy which, from being presented to us in a tangled web of religion and philosophy, is opposed, with the better chance of success, to that sound doctrine upon which the everlasting interests of mankind rest.

* Turton's Natural Theology, p. 38.

CHAPTER XVII.

FURTHER NOTICES OF THE TENDENCY OF MODERN THEOLOGY.

It is impossible to witness the eager thirst for knowledge which characterises the present age, without foreseeing what must happen unless the fountain of living water be kept free from pollution. The Church of England is an appointed guardian of this fountain, and it behoves, not only the appointed ministers of that Church, but every sincere member of it, to watch the signs of the times, and guard against the anti-scriptural deductions of natural philosophers on the one hand, no less than against infidelity, Socinianism, and Popery, on the other. With respect to the latter there is no doubt that the defenders of our faith are vigilant and powerful --but it is by no means so clear that this is the case with respect to the former.

Lord Brougham tells us that the friends of Revelation " appear to be alarmed lest the progress of natural religion should prove dangerous to the acceptance of revealed; lest the former should, as it were, be taken as a substitute for the latter. They argue, as if the two systems were rivals, and whatever credit the one