to the extent of his wants, should have denied to the inferior animals that which, in an inferior degree, proportioned to their wants also, might be advantageous to them. If we cannot understand that the intercourse of animals can proceed to their advantage, without some other powers of communication than those limited cries which strike our ears, a rational theology will not think itself humiliated by investigating a subject that may add to our knowledge and love of the Creator of all things.

There are some striking facts that seem almost to establish the inference, that there is, among many animals, a real language, and that to none of the gregarious tribes, at least, has been denied some mode of communication, fully adequate to their range of ideas. But on this subject we can but touch, as the facts and reasonings in support of this opinion do not admit of any condensed view. Let us be content with pointing it out as a fitting subject for any writer who may undertake a work which we still hope to see executed before much time shall have passed away. Another topic we must yet notice.

It is true that God has given to man "a living soul," and that He has distinguished this favoured being above all others, by opening his eyes to the contemplation of Himself. Thus also is this part of Creation so constituted as to be susceptible, not only personally, but according to the posterity of man, of progressive: improvement; yet it is too often the tendency of man to pride himself in the thought that he is the monopolist of the Divine favour, forgetting that His providence extends to "the sparrow." It is the duty of the sound theologian to labour to extend the knowledge of the goodness of the Deity, and therefore, taking man and his powers as the standard, to enquire how far the inferior animals partake with him. It is no rational Theology to depreciate the inferior animals, for the purpose of exalting man. He will still be the Lord of the Earth, whatever we may admit as to them.

If it can be shewn, as we desire to see it shewn, that the race of animals are, like us, though in other modes and degrees, susceptible of improvement; for this, it is necessary to investigate the faculties, or the metaphysics, of animals, with far more care than has yet been done. Here it is that we come into collision with the term Instinct. We think that this term has been grossly abused, so as even to have led certain persons into hypotheses little better than atheistical; we also think that philosophers in general have, in adopting such nar

row views of the animal faculties, or mind, detracted from the attributes and glory of that Being whose perfections it is our duty to discover and declare.

We may here advert to a late discovery, which highly deserves a place, from the unexpected wisdom and resource which it displays. We give it also, partly as an example of one of those new facts in the science, which it would be incumbent on any future author to search diligently out; one of a number which would lead us to infer, that such a work as we contemplate must be executed by a cultivator of Science at large.

It has been proved that the light of the sun penetrates to but a very moderate depth within the ocean, and that the_great bulk of its waters is consigned to perpetual darkness. Yet is this darkness inhabited by myriads of animals, seeking their food, and performing all their other allotted functions.

He

It remained for almighty Power to dispense with the use of light, and also with the organs adapted to receive its impressions; or to enlighten the mass of ocean, so far as light was required for the purposes of its inhabitants, by other means. has adapted the latter course, has given the organs of sense, and has placed in the ocean those lights which he has invented for this purpose. Would the invention of man have been foiled in suggesting the expedient, which he could not have executed? We know not; but what he had not observed until this day, though it has been so long placed before him, he surely might not, at any other time, have even conceived. Yet nothing can be more simple and more effectual than the contrivance? The animal itself is luminous: every inhabitant of the depths of the ocean bears its own living lamp, to enlighten its own path, or else to serve as the guide to those who would pursue it. Those are the lights of the ocean, so familiar; stars in the abyss, enlightening its darkness, even to the mariner, while they are the objects and the prey of creatures whose lot it is to live for each other's wants. And even this is not all. As no animal that lives subject to the attacks of others, seems deprived of defence, this is a lamp that can be extinguished at pleasure, subjected to the will of the animal, giving it that power, which old Imagination had attributed to the ring of Gyges.

Here is a provision of wisdom for striking ends; and yet not for all that were required. The animal dies, and its light is extinguished, yet not for ever. It would be useless as food, since it could not be found: it might be offensive, from its decay. No sooner is it dead, and the living light extinguished,

than a new process commences, and it becomes universally lurminous: is not this Design? The extinct land animal, equally allotted as the food of those kinds which are appointed to remove offence from the earth, gives no light, because light was not required: light is produced where it was necessary, and no where else.

Even yet we have not traced all. There are marine animals without organs of vision. Yet those have been rendered sensible to light, and so sensible that they will pursue that of a lamp with unerring certainty, receiving the impression perhaps, as vegetables do, on a sensible surface, but exceeding them, by adding the powers of locomotion. Surely Providence has cared for the meanest of its creatures, in thus creating what we may safely call a separate arrangement in nature, of the element of Light, for their especial uses.

To return to Paley. We are not convinced that he acted judiciously in limiting, as he has done, his astronomical views. To shew that what is, could not rightly have been otherwise, and thence to prove Design, was unquestionably necessary; but it was not beyond the true plan of a Natural Theology, to mark, to the utmost of our knowledge, the magnificence, the power, and the extent of Omnipotence, as it is displayed in this part of creation-the awful sight of an universe in motion! Even reasonable conjecture as to what is yet imperfectly known of its ways in the great system, was not inadmissible; and need we say what a range for this end has been opened by modern discove ries? If we have insinuated a condemnation of that dryness and apparent severity of logic which pervades this work, it is here perhaps especially that the author has, by thus cramping himself in the trammels of an attempt at rigid demonstration, renounced advantages which are never trifling, where we must write for the excitement of the more generous, grateful, and lofty feelings of human nature.

The title of the work that we would urge on the leisure and science of our contemporaries, might be that ancient one, "The Wonders of God in Creation;" and under its plan much ought to be admitted, even where our yet imperfect knowledge cannot clearly explain the Design. That which cannot be explained, must continue to rank among Wonders, until it is explained. In surrendering all that, to us, still appears marvellous and obscure, we should deprive ourselves of a vast range of materials; we must also remember that He is The Wonderful, that to admire his wondrous works is our natural impulse as well as our duty, and that if among them there is probably much that our

faculties will never be able to take altogether out of this hallowed precinct, much even of that magnificent obscure may be the province of religious feeling.

Yet let us name the rising science, if a separate science it be, of Magnetism; let us indicate enquiries into less obvious parts of creation which seem to connect animal and vegetable existence; and where the vegetable world itself appears to pass into the realms of inanimate matter. In all this, and in far more, our researches, imperfect as they may be, cannot fail to elicit something which will demonstrate the resources, the power and wisdom of the Deity. By this we shall show Providence every where, and if even we are still to be partially condemned to the wonder of ignorance, learn to adore.

Thus at least, at the very least, we shall teach: and if we can teach, it will be to convey our knowledge inseparable from the idea of the stupendous Being who created all and governs all. This we desire, and this we yet expect to see executed ;-soberly also, and with science, as a work addressed to a rational and scientific age. It must not repel those whose suspicious severity of mind, or whose unsettled conviction renders them reluctant to receive its wisdom;-it must not exclaim more than it demonstrates ;-it must not hazard its sacred ends in its attempts to influence the feelings, where it should primarily address itself to the understanding.

The Difficulties of Romanism.

By GEORGE STANLEY FABER, B.D., Rector of Long Newton. 12s. London. 1826. Romanist Conversations: or Dialogues between a Romanist and a Protestant, published at Geneva in 1713: translated from the original French. By HENRY HUNTINGFORD, LL.B., Fellow of Winchester College. 1s. London. 1826.

THE exposures of Popery, Romanism, or Roman Catholicism (for we will not trouble ourselves about shades of nomenclature) cannot be multiplied too much in the present times. We therefore greet the appearance of two works, each, in its kind, of considerable merit, though very different in rank and claims. To begin with the more important: Mr. Faber's work is a review of Romanism, in answer to a French publication with which Monseigneur Trévern, formerly Vicar-general of Langres, and now Bishop of Aire, has, it appears, disputed, if not shaken or subverted the faith of some of the tra

velling English laity in France. We have not seen the French work which Mr. Faber has chosen as his text-book; but, from the answer it appears not to deserve the high degree of deference which our learned English apologist shews to both it and the writer. Traces of an insidious smoothness of style, more dangerous than all the roughest controversial violence of oldtimes, frequently appear in the allusions to, and quotations from the Discussion Amicale.

66

"Your own theologians," says the Bishop of Aire to his English friend, no less than ourselves, have in their hands the ancient liturgies of the primitive Church, and the works of the early ecclesiastical writers; but they will have small inclination, I suspect, to bring you acquainted with such documents. Ask them to communicate these documents to you: desire them to specify the opinions which they express. You will soon find, that they take your request with no very good grace; and, in truth, to deal plainly with you, it is impossible that they should. Ah well, Sir, I will spare them their embarrassment: and, so far as you are concerned, I will go on to accomplish their defective ministrations *."

Such an opinion of the general character of the English clergy, as to religious sincerity, very naturally leads to the following proposal of an union between our national Church and that of Rome. We present the Bishop's plan of reunion amicale, in Mr. Faber's and the Bishop's words.

"Once defined, the principles of the Latin Church are IRREVOCABLE She herself is immutably chained by bonds, which at no future period can she ever rend asunder +. In regard, therefore, to doctrine, any concession is plainly impossible. Yet, as the bishop undertakes to promise for her, she will cheerfully do every thing that in reason can be expected. Let the Church of England adopt all the doctrines of the Church of Rome; and the Church of Rome, on her part, will be disposed to make grand concessions on point of discipline. Such concessions her principle of IMMUTABILITY does not forbid. Hence, in return for the sacrifice which we make on doctrinal points, she will freely concede to us communion under both kinds, the marriage of ecclesiastics, divine service in the vulgar tongue, all the ceremonies, all the vestments, all the sacerdotal ornaments, all the decorations of the altars and churches. By this arrangement, as the Bishop justly observes, matters would seem precisely the same as before. The change would be absolutely invisible. It would be a simple alteration of our faith, which resides only in the intellectual part of our nature: while

Discuss. Amic. vol. ii. p. 8, quoted by Mr. Faber. + Ib. Letter. xviii. ap. id.