indeed, with any part, of our being and concerns. When examined, they are found to be heterogeneous dreams, without even the semblance of truth or of proof.

It is not so with the scheme for which we plead. We can imagine nothing ner or more perfect than the Christian life; nothing lovelier than the Christian character; nothing happier than the Christian state. Here the mind has taken a celestial and god-like mould; is formed for a scene of unparalleled enjoyment; of splendours which surpass all the glories of this world; of friendships the most pure, and rich, and intense; of pursuits the most sublime and transporting.

In the meanwhile, this exalted expectation re-acts, with the best possible effect, on the duties and pleasures of the present life; and the joy alone, which is said immediately to flow from a right reception and experience of religion, must, if there be such joy at all, far surpass all earthly pleasures. For instance : We might judge, before the fact, that communion with God would be ineffably delightful: All temporal friendships, however sweet and strong, are but tasteless drops, when compared with this rich and copious libation, this "wine upon the lees well refined." Is it reasonable to suppose, that the benevolent God, who made the secret springs of mind and heart, should leave them to be touched merely by human loves, and not by the far more noble and ravishing impressions of his own Spirit? And if we suppose him to let out the streams of his goodness upon the soul, who, with a view to such enjoyment, has been purified, and strengthened, and excited to an ardent thirst after it, how embuing, how entrancing, must be the consequent emotions! Is the poet happy in the brilliant creations of his imaginative genius? Let him stretch that genius to the utmost: The Christian, in the far more powerful range of a Divine faith, beholds far other visions; visions marked, indeed, by grand distinctions, when contrasted with the others; for they are loftier-they are realities—yes, and they are all his own!

All these, and other considerations connected with this first reason, viewed together;-the necessity of some superior state of things; our thirst to obtain it; a mind endued with powers of taste and judgment, not to contrive, but to determine, the fitness of a remedy, when offered; a great variety of such professed schemes presented; their claims searched into separately, and by comparison; and revelation, thus examined,

appearing obviously to be the most pure, and unexceptionable, and excellent, as a whole, including a much more extensive range of subjects in its professed discoveries; and furnishing sufficient means, if the system be true, for the perfect realization of its grand pretensions;-all these, we repeat, contemplated in mere theory, may induce a rational conviction of the perfect fitness of the whole.

A second reason may be drawn from the excellent effects apparently produced by the Gospel. We say, "apparently," because the deist cannot possibly object to the term. Had we used the word "certainly," he would, no doubt, have denied the fact.

It is, however, beyond all question, that most excellent effects, whatever be the real cause, stand in regular collocation with the prevalence of the system. These occur with such frequency, and with such general uniformity,-the uniformity, not of physical, but of moral, operation,-as to indicate their cause with the accustomed certainty belonging to those cases which exemplify the formation and influence of human character. We have as good reason to infer the real power of religious causes from the facts connected with them, as to conclude, from the history of education, that systems of moral philosophy, and the various modes of public and private teaching, in regard to morals, have been useful to the world. Nay, we will venture to assert, without the fear of refutation, that, other things being equal, the effects connected with these systems are by no means so numerous, or so determinable, with respect to their cause, as in the case of Christianity.

But this comparison must not include those multitudes of persons, in every age and country, who pay no reasonable attention to the subject of religion. If by far the greater part of a nation called "Christian will not concern themselves even with the first and general proposals of the Gospel, revelation must not be answerable, either for this inattention, or for any of the crimes which such persons may commit. If this, and other balancing conditions, which we need not mention, be taken into the account, we shall have no great reason to fear the result of the inquiry.

He, then, who asks me to prove the effects in question to have resulted from the Gospel, might, with equal propriety, demand a proof why excellent effects should, in any case, arise from moral instruction; why, for instance, the prosperity of

the ancient Romans, in the early periods of their state, should be thought the consequence of their virtues; or, indeed, why light should flow from the rising of the sun.

What the effects themselves are, produced by the Gospel, whether with regard to nations, or public institutions, or families, or individuals, may be abundantly known, not only from historians, and the writers on the Evidences, but also from our own impartial observation of the instances around us.

Now, if such effects are rationally attributable to this one cause, it is easy to admit its adaptation, either as a natural or supernatural means of producing them. That they should so operate, and be constructed, notwithstanding, on a contrary principle, is not very probable. But if the deist still believes, that such effects are improperly ascribed to the Gospel, he must, then, remove the grounds themselves on which we infer the connexion between cause and effect in this particular instance; and we think they are the same which support us in drawing a similar conclusion in all other instances. He must also prove, that, whatever may be the judgment formed of such grounds of decision, they do not apply to the point in hand; and that the effects already mentioned neither did, nor could, result from the Christian faith. He must do more: He must show other and sufficient causes.

The last reason to be named at present, why we ought to receive the scheme of Scripture as fit and proper for its avowed design, is testimony;-the testimony of those who have sincerely and cordially believed and received it.

Christianity is known to be a suitable and sufficient remedy, by thousands who have made it the subject of experiment. Many of these have eminently advanced in virtue and excellence, so as to command the admiration of the deist himself; and have continually asserted, that there was a perfect correspondence between the religion of Christ, and their own views and feelings; and that, from this very system they had formed their moral character, and drawn the chief portion of their solace and enjoyment; and all this, after having tried the tendency of deism. And, on the other hand, when some of these have fallen from excellence into a course of vice, their abandonment of the Gospel has run parallel with their declension in morals;-a circumstance which has been learned as well from the obvious fact of the case, as from their own free acknowledgment.

Are

Now, why should not these testimonies be received? the men in question competent to give evidence in every other case of experience? Do we admit as credible whatever they may affirm as to the effect of history, and literature, and science, on their own minds? Is their testimony admissible in a court of justice, not merely as to the truth of the fact attested, but also in regard to their own opinion and emotion, connected with it, at the time of its occurrence? Why, then, are they disqualified in the single case of religion? Is this the only one in which they are insincere and disqualified? If so, what can be the reason of this peculiarity?

To say, "Men often utter notions in regard to their own experience, which all must allow to be enthusiasm," is saying nothing to the purpose. What can be more wild than certain opinions in philosophy? Even pure science has been the subject of reverie. And must these be wholly rejected on account of such abuses? If not, why this favouritism? And why this exclusive antipathy to religion?

or, if

Shall we put in the balance with this testimony, the assertions, you please, the doubtful reasonings, of the deist? Suppose we should say, not reasons, but demonstrations; ought not a plain, unlettered man, quite ignorant of logic, to trust his own experience, and the testimony of a sensible and honest friend, rather than such proofs ?

of com

There is a method of demonstrating, by diagrams, the equality, or the precise inequality, of two given triangles. But this is in some sense by abstraction. We cannot even lift one diagram from the paper and affix it to another, for the purpose bining sensible experience with the process. A joiner, however, in a practical case, comes to a perfect conclusion at once. He takes two triangular pieces of wood, and, putting them together, determines the question, not only to his own satisfaction, but to that of any other person who shall know him to be a competent evidence. He knows nothing of the problem, but he knows the result without it. Religion, in like manner, as to its truth, is, with people in general, not so much a matter of strict reasoning, as of intuitive perception and sensible trial.

It will probably be said, that the testimony of the deist, on this subject, is as good as that of the Christian. It ought, no doubt, to be considered in this light, if no circumstance exist to make a difference between them. Now, the religion of the Bible

cannot, with him, be the subject of experimental testimony, for his principles disallow its very existence. If he say, he was once a Christian, and thought himself sincere; and that his consciousness of the power of religion on his mind was perfectly delusive, as he conceives to be the case in all instances of religious profession; still this only proves to himself the truth of his present principles, and confirms the fact of his incompetency to speak from his own knowledge, on a subject which he thus affirms to be incapable of experiment. What should we think of the logic of the man who, having made some ineffectual attempts to learn the sciences of chemistry and astronomy, should renounce them entirely, and affirm there was no truth in either, because, forsooth, he could never understand them?

But should we give the infidel the entire credit which he claims, the case would even then include a simple opposition as to testimony; and the question would be, how to strike the balance between the authorities; whether by an appeal to numbers, or to moral character, or to intellect, or to any other rule of judgment.

The least that can be said is, that the immense body of highly respectable testimony to the fitness for which we contend, makes it very probable, either that the scheme is true, and was designedly shaped out to suit the ends implied in this fitness; or that some most singular ingenuity has been employed to give so deceptive an appearance of adaptation; or that the most infatuating influence ever known to the world, attends the preaching of the Gospel, in regard to all who believe it. To whichsoever conclusion we may come, the subject clearly deserves from the infidel a serious, a profound, and an impartial inquiry.

V. EXAMPLES OF ADAPTATION AND OF EXCELLENCE.

AN extensive and interesting field now opens before us; but into which, with all its beauties, we can enter only to a general and transient view. The numerous and ranging principles, laid down in the foregoing sections, ought here to be distinctly applied to the general character and different branches of Divine revelation. There are, however, other reasons sufficiently obvious to the reader, besides the limit fixed to the present essay, why this cannot now be done. Peculiar qualifications would be requisite, to accomplish this design completely and effectually.

We may, at least, just mention certain leading subjects, which,