7. May we not, on the whole, foberly affirm, that the fcheme of neceffity is philofophy in her right mind? And that the fcheme of contingency is philofophy run mad?

CHAP. III.

Several Objections, to the Scheme of Necefity, anfwered.

IT

T feems most agreeable to the radical fimplicity, which God has obferved in his works, to fuppofe, that, in themselves, all human fouls are equal. I can easily believe, that the foul of an oyfterwoman has, naturally, the (unexpanded) powers of Grotius, or of Sir Ifaac Newton: and that what conduces to raise the philofopher, the poet, the politician, or the linguift, fo much above the ignorant and ftupid of mankind, is not only the circumftance of intellectual cultivation, but (ftill more than that) his having the happiness to occupy a better house, i. e. a body more commodiously organized, than they.

The. foul of a monthly reviewer, if imprisoned within the fame mud walls which are tenanted by the foul of Mr. John Wefley, would, fimilarly circumstanced, reafon and act (I verily think) exactly like the bishop of Moorfields. And I know fome very fenfible people, who even go fo far, as to fuppofe, that, was an human spirit fhut up in the skull of a cat, pufs would, notwithstanding, move prone on all four, pur when ftroked, fpit when pinched, and birds and mice be her darling objects of purfuit.

Now, though I can, by no means, for my own part, carry matters to fo extreme a length as this;

yet,

yet, I repeat my opinion, that much, very much, depends on corporeal organization. Whence the ufual remark, that a man is (I would rather fay, appears to be) fenfible and ingenious, according to his dimenfion and folid content of brain. That is, as I apprehend, the foul is more capable of exerting its powers, when lodged in a capacious and wellconftructed vehicle. I dare believe, that the brain of Dr. Thomas Nowell is, to that of Mr. John Wefley, as two to one, at the very leaft. all this is the refult of abfolute neceffity. is brain, but matter peculiarly modified? is the modifier? Not man, but God.

And yet, For, what And who

I just now hinted the conjecture of fome, that an human fpirit, incarcerated in the brain of a cat, would, probably, both think and behave, as that animal now does. But how would the foul* of a cat acquit itself, if inclosed in the brain of a man? We cannot refolve this question, with certainty, any more than the other. We may, however, even on this occafion, addrefs every one of our human brethren in those words of that great philofophic neceffitarian, St. Paul; and afk, who maketh thee to differ from the lowest of the brute creation? Thy Maker's freewill, not thine. And what pre

Let not the reader ftart, at that expreffion, The foul of a cat.' For though the word, fo applied, may feem ftrange to those who bave not weighed both fides of the question (it would have feemed very ftrange to me, about fifteen years ago); yet, on giving the caufe an impartial hearing, the fcale of evidence will, in my judgment, ftrongly decide for an immaterial principle in brutes.

I mean not, here, to difcufs the argument. But let me hint, that one principal hinge, on which the enquiry turns, is: Do thofe inferior beings reafon, or do they not? If they do (be it in ever so small a degree), they must confift of fomething more than body: i. e. they must be compounded of matter and fpirit.-If they do not reafon at all (and we may as well doubt whether they can feel at all); we may fet them down for mere material machines.-He, however, who seriously thinks, that even birds, or infects, are watches; may, with equal eafe, while his hand is in, advance a few steps higher, and fuppofe, that men are clocks, i. e. larger watches of the three.

eminence

eminence haft thou, which thou didst not receive from him? Not the leaft, nor the thadow of any.Now, if thou didst [not acquire, but] receive it, as a diftinguishing gift of his free and fovereign pleasure, why carrieft thou thyfelf proudly (xaxacas), as though thou hadst not received it* ?

"He, who through vaft immensity can pierce; "See worlds on worlds compofe one univerfe; "Can tell how fyftem beyond fyftem runs ; "What other planets circle other funs; "What vary'd being peoples ev'ry star : May tell, why Heav'n has made us as we are."

What the poet could not tell, the Bible does.Why are we made as we are?" Even fo, Father: for fo it feemed good in thy fight. Which is anfwer enough to fatisfy me.

I take the truth of the matter to be this. All the intellectual diftinctions, which obtain throughout the whole fcale of animated exiftence, from the brighteft angel down to man, and which give advantage to one man above another; which intellectual diftinctions defcend, likewife, in just gradations, from man, to the minuteft animalcule; are diftributed, to each individual, in number, in measure, and in weight, by the fovereign will and the unerring hand of God the only wife. The ufes, to which thofe intellectual powers fhall fubferve; the term of their duration; and, in fhort, every circumftance relative both to them and their poffeffors; I confider as falling under the regulation of God's determining and permiffive decree before time, and of his everpresent and ever-acting providence in time.

According to this fcheme of things (a scheme, which, when fairly weighed, will be found the most chearful to men, and the moft worthy of God, which

* 1 Cor. iv. 7.

+ Wifd. xi. 20.

was

was ever proposed to the human mind), that melancholy, that abfurd, that atheistical fiction, whose name is Chance, has nothing to do with God or with his works. On the contrary, the golden chain of neceffity, providence, or fate (it is no matter which you term it), is let down, from the throne of the fupreme, through all the ranks of animated and of unanimated creation: guiding and governing every individual spirit, and every individual atom, by fuch means, and in fuch a manner, as beft comport with the dignity, the efficacy, the wifdom, and the love, of him who holds the chain, and who has implicated every link.

Thus, he doth according to his will, in the armies of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth'; and none can stay his hand, or fay unto him, What doeft thou? Hence it is, that the very hairs of our heads are all numbered in his book; and not one of them can fall from its pore, without the leave of Heaven. He is the guardian of fparrows; and will not let what we account the meaneft infect expire, until the point of time, divinely deftined, is come. He not only tells the number of the

stars, and calls them each by name; but notices and directs the very particles of § duft, which float in the atmosphere. The || fun fhines not, but at his command: nor can a ** wind blow, but by authority from him. May we not fay, of neceffity, what the Pfalmift fays, of the central luminary, round which our globe is wheeled; that there is nothing hid from the heat thereof?

And yet, there are those, who think, that neceffity makes no part of the Chriftian system!

Mr. Wefley is, or pretends to be, of this number. Let us give a concife hearing to the difficulties, which, in his eftimation, clog the fcheme of evan

* Dan. iv. 35. Ifaiah xl. 12.

+ Matth. x. 29, 30.
Job ix. 7.

Pfalm cxlvii. 4. ** Pfalm cxxxv. 7.

gelical

gelical and philofophical fate: though they are fuch as have been refuted again and again.

1. "There can be no moral good, or evil; no virtue, and no vice."

So thought* Aristotle; and his difciples, the Peripatetics. Hence, they defined moral virtue to be an elective habit, flowing originally from freewill, and rendered eafy by repeated acts.

It is no wonder, that proud heathens (hould thus err; feeing they know not the Scriptures, nor the power of God. But Mr. Wefley should remember, that he has read, and profeffes to believe, a book which tells him, that a man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven; that we cannot even think a good thought, unless God breathe it into our hearts; and that it is the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, who must work in us that which is well-pleafing in his fight §.

Nor should his lordship of Moorfields forget, that he has folemnly fubfcribed (to omit all present mention of articles and homilies) a certain liturgy in which liturgy, among a thoufand other paffages equally excellent, God himself is addreffed, as the fole being, from whom all holy defires, all good counfels [or fincerely devout intentions], and all just works, do proceed. The fupreme is, likewise, in the fame "Calviniftical and Antinomian Prayerbook," declared to be the almighty and everlasting God, who maketh us both to will and to do thofe things that be good, and acceptable to his divine

* And yet Ariftotle, though a vehement, was not (any more than his difciple of the Foundery) a confiftent, freewill man. Hence, Ariftotle, being once asked, "Who can keep a fecret?" made this odd answer: He that can hold red-hot coals in his mouth.-Surely, Freewill must be very feeble, and Neceffity irrefiftibly potent, upou this principle! Not to afk: If Freewill cannot, on a proper occafion, fhut the mouth of the man that has it; how can it bring him virtue, and fave his foul?

+ John iii. 27.

2 Cor. iii. 5.

§ Hebr. xiii. 21.

majefty.