"Since I was of understanding (fays the learned "and candid Sir Thomas Brown) to know we "know nothing, my reafon hath been more pliable "to the will of faith. I am now content to un“derstand a mystery without a rigid definition in "an easy and Platonic description. Where there "is an obfcurity too deep for our reafon, it is "good to fit down with a description, periphrafis, " or adumbration. By acquainting our reafon how "unable it is to display the visible and obvious "effects of nature, it becomes more humble and "fubmiffive to the fubtilties of faith." Such objections to the frame of our religion as have no other ground than the impoffibility of bringing it entire within the scope of our understandings, are ftifled in the very womb of infidelity; they are ftrangled ere they can pafs the threshold of life. Plainly, then, the attempt is ridiculous to oppose them to that invisible system, in respect to which our experience fupplies no documents or data. When this new life fhall come, and our fouls fhall branch out into new faculties and perceptions, then, perhaps, a new order of facts will arife to reconcile thefe apparent difficulties and incongruities

gruities, by presenting us with a full display of their dependencies and relations.

Another clafs of cavillers have objected to this argument from analogy, that its conclufions are imperfect, and that nothing is established by it ou the affirmative fide. Such reafoners do not confider how much it conduces to a point, to overcome the prefumptions against it; how greatly an argument is ftrengthened by the removal of prejudices; and how much the native force of reason can avail, when rescued from thefe great incumbrances. They do not confider, that to remove the prefumptions against religious teftimony, is to place it on the fame grounds with common historical teftimony; and that, when this is done, no colour of confiftency is left to infidels, unless they carry their incredulity to every fyftem of facts that is grounded on the records of man: for fuppofing there be nothing intrinfically incredible in what our religion, whether natural or revealed, commands us to believe, nothing is more clear, than that the external teftimony on which it reposes, is above any common historical evidence; is more fupported by witneffes, more confirmed by docu

ments,

ments, more ftrengthened by circumftantial coincidences and correfponding relations.

The potent operation of this negative virtue belongs in an eminent degree to the argument from analogy, the direct tendency of which is to vindicate religion from thofe ordinary prefumptions against it, which consist in an opinion that its doctrines are internally more incredible than the common facts of history; and that, supposing no actual proofs to exift of the objects of our daily experience, ftill they would have greater claims in themfelves to be received, and a higher colour of probability. This opinion, founded on habit and prejudice, is clearly refuted by the reasons which analogy fupplies; and the objects of our faith are placed in a light to receive the full advantage of all the proofs and authorities which belong to them. As a faithful handmaid to Religion, it attends upon it to decorate its form, and improve its comeliness; to debarrass its motions, and to difplay its attractions; to difpofe the white robe in which Truth has arrayed it, and to remove the obstacles which error and obftinacy have thrown in its path.

But

But though the principal strength of this reafoning from analogy confifts in its negative proofs, yet it is by no means deftitute of force, when viewed on the affirmative fide: while it effectually removes all prefumptious against religion, it fupplies to the candid and reasonable, a variety of pofitive conclufions in its favour. If a correfpondence be clearly displayed between revealed religion and God's natural and moral government of the world, so strong that they appear to be evidently conducted in the fame spirit, and under fimilar laws, it is beyond obduracy to deny the inference of a common origin. The argument then at this point leaves us to determine who was the author of both thefe difpenfations, and to decide between chance and providence; for in reality there is no alternative, whatever terms and denominations the wantonnefs of infidelity has dared to invent. To erect, therefore, this argument from analogy on its proper bafis, we have only to establish as a datum, that the phænomena of nature, and the moral government of the world, are from the hands of the Almighty. With this footing it is complete, and in a fyllogiftic form runs thus:

God

God is the author of the natural and the moral government of the world; but the natural and moral government of the world, and the fyftem of revealed religion, are evidently derived from one and the fame author. Therefore God is the author of the system of revealed religion.

I am so jealous of the honour of the subject of this Paper, and at the fame time fo well aware how foon it fatigues the light character of the prefent race of readers, that I have determined not to prefs it too far, nor even to carry it on to the conclufion of this day's entertainment. As the next letter in Eugenio's packet is very fhort, I cannot do better perhaps than terminate this Paper with it, especially as nothing comes from that quarter, but what will well harmonise with religious contemplations. The letter is frem Amelia to Eugenio.

66 MY BEST OF FRIENDS,

"And does the little vista in the wood begin "to look delightful? Then does every place else "begin to look dull to me; for no place has`atVOL. II. "tractions

C