Lecture XVIII. Religious Duties of Man.

Consideration of man's duties to God, so far as discoverable by the light of nature—Natural theology a branch of natural philosophy—Not superseded by revelation—Brown, Stewart, and Chalmers quoted—Natural theology a guide to the sound interpretation of Scripture—Foundation of natural religion in the faculties of man—Distinction between morals and religion—The Bible does not create the religious feelings, but is fitted only to enlighten, enliven, and direct them—Illustration of this view—Stability of religion, even amid the downfal of churches and creeds—Moral and religious duties prescribed to man by natural theology—Prevalent erroneous views of divine worship—Natural evidence of God's existence and attributes—Man's ignorance the cause of the past barrenness and obscurity of natural religion—Importance of the Book of Creation as a revelation of the Divine Will.

Having discussed the foundation of moral philosophy, the duties of man as an individual and as a social being, and also the causes of the independence and freedom of nations, with the relations of the different forms of government to the moral and intellectual conditions of the people, I proceed to consider man's duty to God, so far as this can be discovered by the light of nature.

Lord Brougham, in his "Discourse of Natural Theology," maintains, with great truth, that natural theology is a branch of natural philosophy. His argument is the following: It is a truth of physics, that vision is performed by the eye refracting light, and making it converge to a focus upon the retina. The eye is an optical instrument, which, by the peculiar combination of its lenses, and the different materials they are composed of, produces vision. Design and adaptation are clearly manifested in its construction. These are truths in natural philosophy; but a single step converts them into evidences in natural theology. The eye must have been formed by a Being possessing knowledge of the properties of light, and of the matter of which the eye is composed: that Being is no inhabitant of earth: He is superior to man: He is his Maker: He is God. Thus, the first branch of natural theology, or that which treats of the existence and power of the Deity, rests on the same basis with physical science; in fact, it is a direct induction from the truths of science.

The second branch of natural theology treats of the duties of man towards God, and of the probable designs of the Deity in regard to his creatures. The facts of mental philosophy stand in the same relation to this branch, that the facts in physical science stand in relation to the first branch. By contemplating each mental faculty, the objects to which it is related by its constitution, its sphere of action, its uses and abuses, we may draw conclusions regarding the divine intentions in creating our faculties, and touching the duty which we owe to God in the employment of them. It is obvious, that as God has given us understanding able to discriminate the uses and abuses of our faculties; and moral sentiments, leading us to prefer their use; we owe it to Him as a duty to fulfil his intentions, thus obviously expressed in our creation, by using our powers aright, and not abusing them.

The second branch of natural theology, like the first, rests upon the same foundation with all the other inductive sciences; the only difference being, that the one belongs chiefly to the inductive science of physics, and the other to the inductive science of mind.^* This distinction, however, is not perfectly accurate; because the evidence of the existence and attributes of God, and also of man's duty towards Him, may be found in both of these branches of science.

It has been objected, that revelation supersedes the necessity of studying natural theology. Dr Thomas Brown, in his Lectures on Moral Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh, has furnished a brief, but powerful, answer to this objection. "On this subject," says he,^* "that comprehends the sublimest of all the truths which man is permitted to attain, the benefit of revelation may be considered to render every inquiry superfluous, that does not flow from it. But to those who are blessed with a clearer illumination, it cannot be uninteresting to trace the fainter lights, which, in the darkness of so many gloomy ages, amid the oppression of tyranny in various forms, and of superstition more afflicting than tyranny itself, could preserve, still dimly visible to man, that virtue which he was to love, and that Creator whom he was to adore. Nor can it be without profit, even to their better faith, to find all nature thus concurring, as to its most important truths, with revelation itself; and every thing, living and inanimate, announcing that high and holy One, of whose perfections they have been privileged with a more splendid manifestation."

Dugald Stewart, in his Outlines of Moral Philosophy, also treats at considerable length of natural religion. "The study of philosophy," says he,^† "in all its various branches, both natural and moral, affords at every step a new illustration that the design which we trace in creation indicates wisdom, and that it operates in conformity to one uniform plan, insomuch that the truths of natural religion gain an accession of evidence from every addition that is made to the stock of human knowledge."

Dr Chalmers, in the fifth chapter of his Bridge-water Treatise, discusses "the special and subordinate adaptations of external nature to the moral constitution of man," and observes, "Notwithstanding the blight which has so obviously passed over the moral world, and defaced many of its original lineaments, while it has left the materialism of creation, the loveliness of its scenes and landscapes, in a great measure untouched—still we possess very much the same materials for a Natural Theology, in reasoning on the element of virtue as in reasoning on the element of beauty." (P. 191.)

Farther—I consider the study of natural theology as important in leading to a sound interpretation of Scripture itself. Great differences exist in the interpretations of its declarations by different sects; and, as all truth must be harmonious, it appears to me that whenever the constitution of man and the attributes of the Deity shall be ascertained, so far as this is possible, by strictly logical inductions from facts correctly observed in nature, all interpretations of Scripture touching these points must be brought into harmony with nature, otherwise they will justly be regarded as erroneous. Every well established doctrine in moral philosophy and in natural theology, founded on the constitution of nature, will be a plumb-line by which to adjust interpretations of Scripture. The scriptural doctrine of the corruption of human nature, for example, is one on which a vast variety of opinions is entertained by Christians. Phrenology shews that every faculty has received from the Creator an organ, and been furnished with legitimate objects, although each of them has also a wide sphere in which it may commit abuses. As the evidence of the organs is physical and indestructible, the views correctly deduced from it, must in time extinguish all interpretations of Scripture that are at variance with them. When Scripture is inter-

^* See Lord Brougham's Discourses. 3d edit.. p. 98 His argument is not clear.

^* Vol iv. D.401

^† Page 271.

page 105 preted in such a manner as to contradict the sound conclusions of reason on subjects which lie within the legitimate province of reason, such interpretations must be powerless, or positively mischievous. The Christian world, at present (1846), appears to be in a state of transition. In Germany, a large portion of the people, under the guidance of Johannes Ronge, have thrown off Roman Catholicism, also rejected the dogmas of the Protestant churches established at the Reformation, and adopted Rationalistic interpretations of Scripture. As a contrast to this movement, a number of the scholars of Oxford, under the influence of Dr Pusey, have gone over to the Church of Rome; while the middle classes in Scotland have abandoned their ancient Presbyterian Church, reared a new one on the same foundation, and embraced with fresh fervour the doctrines and opinions of the sixteenth century, rejected by the Germans. In these evolutions, no appeal has been made to the lights afforded by the New Philosophy; but as the sound dictates of reason are the revelations of God's attributes and will to the human understanding, through the medium of our natural constitution and that of external nature, they cannot be neglected with impunity by any class of teachers; and the day is on the wing when this philosophy will purify and control every Christian creed.

It is gratifying to trace the recognition of this principle in the works of divines. The Rev. Baden Powell, Savilian Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford, in his work on "the Connexion of Natural and Divine Truth," says, "Physical science is the necessary foundation of natural theology: certain of the truths it discloses are warnings against mistaking the purport of Scripture; and the right use of the caution thus inculcated applies widely in the interpretation of revelation. Inductive philosophy is subservient both to natural and revealed religion. The investigation of God's works is an essential introduction to the right reception of his Word."

In like manner, there should be no philosophy that is not religious;—that is to say, which should not be viewed as a chapter of the Creator's great book of revelation, addressed to the human understanding in the constitution of the universe.

I proceed, therefore, to consider the subject of natural theology, without fearing that, if properly conducted, it will endanger any other class of truths.

The first point which I propose to investigate relates to the foundation of natural religion. I beg of you to observe that religion emanates from sentiments or emotions, and that it does not consist of a collection of mere intellectual conceptions or ideas. The foundations of it lie in the organs of Veneration, "Wonder, and Hope. A brief explanation will enable you to understand this view. "War springs originally, not from the human intellect, but from the propensities of Combativeness and Destructiveness, which give an instinctive tendency to oppose, to contend, and to destroy. There are legitimate spheres within which these propensities may act beneficially; but when they are too energetic, they carry captive the other powers, enlist them in their service, and then lead to the extensive destruction and horrors of war. Combativeness and Destructiveness, operating in savage man with very little intellect, produce war in which ambush and cunning, clubs and bows and arrows, are used as the means of assault. The same propensities, acting in the nations of modern Europe, lead to the employment of scientific principles in the construction of works of attack and of defence, and to the use of cannon, and other ingenious and complicated instruments of destruction. Still, Combativeness and Destructiveness are the original sources in the human mind from which war itself, in all its forms and with all its weapons, flows. If these instincts were not possessed, men would feel no impulse to fight, any more than they feel an impulse to fly. In like manner, the whole art of music rests on the organs of Tune and Time as its foundation. In some individuals, these organs are extremely defective; and they not only feel no internal impulse prompting them to produce melody, but are insensible to its charms when produced by others. In other persons, again, these organs act with such energy, that they impel them, as it were, to elicit music from every object. You may have seen individuals, who, in want of a better instrument, have beat out passable tunes by a succession of blows on their chins. When the musical organs engage the intellectual faculties to assist them, they obtain, by their aid, instruments for producing music, refined and perfect in proportion to the degree in which the intellect is instructed in the various arts and sciences capable of being applied to the production of such instruments. Still, you perceive that the origin or foundation of the whole art and practice of music lies in the organs of Tune and Time.

Farther—You can readily infer that war will be practised by any nation very much in the proportion which Combativeness and Destructiveness bear in them to the other faculties. If these propensities preponderate over the moral sentiments, the people will be constantly craving for war, and seeking occasions for quarrels. If they be very feeble, public attention will be directed to other and more peaceful pursuits, and contentions will, as far as possible, be avoided. If we wish to tame a warlike people to the arts of peace, we must try to stimulate their higher faculties, and to remove all objects calculated to excite their pugnacious propensities. The same remarks apply to music. A native love of music will prevail in any people, in proportion to the natural endowment of the organs of Tune and Time in their brains. If we wish to cultivate music in a people, we must address the organs of Tune and Time by the sweetest and most touching melodies, and thereby call them gently and agreeably into action; because by exercising them, and by no other means, can we increase their energy, and augment that people's love of music.

Similar observations apply to religion. The foundations of religion lie in the organ of Veneration, which instinctively feels emotions of reverence and respect;—in the organ of Wonder, which longs after the new, the astonishing, and the supernatural, and which, combined with Veneration, leads us to adore an unseen power;—and in the organ of Hope, which instinctively looks forward in expectation to future enjoyment. These inspire man with a ceaseless desire to offer homage to a superior Being, to adore him, and to seek his protection. The inherent activity of these organs has prompted men in all ages to employ their intellectual faculties to discover as many facts as possible concerning the existence and attributes of superior powers, or gods, and to institute ceremonies for their gratification. In some tribes of savages, we are informed that no traces of religion have been discovered; but you will find that in them the organs which I have named are extremely small. They are in the same condition in regard to the religious feelings, that other tribes, in whom the organs of Tune and Time are deficient, stand in regard to melody; these have no music, in consequence of the extreme feebleness of the related organs in their brains. On the other hand, whereever the organs of the religious sentiments are large in a people, that nation or tribe will be found to be proportionally devoted to religion. If their intellectual faculties be feeble, if they have no science and no true revelation to direct them, they may be page 106 engulfed in superstition; but superstition is only the religious sentiments gone astray. They may be found worshipping stocks and stones, reptiles, and idols of the most revolting description; but still, this shews not only that the tendency to worship exists in them, but that it may be manifested in great vigour when the intellect is feeble or very imperfectly informed. It proves also that these sentiments are in themselves blind or mere general impulses, which will inevitably err, unless directed by an illumination superior to their own.

The religious sentiments may act in combination with the propensities, or with the moral sentiments. In combination with the lower feelings, they produce a cold, cruel, and selfish faith, in which the votary's chief object is to secure the favour of Heaven for himself; while he allots endless and nearly universal misery to the rest of mankind. In combination with Benevolence and Conscientiousness, they lead to a faith in which justice and mercy, truth and humility, prevail.

There is a distinction in nature between morals and religion. The organs of Conscientiousness and Benevolence are the foundations of morals. When they are predominantly large, they produce the tendency to do justly, and to act kindly, towards all men; but if the organs of the religious sentiments be deficient, there will not be an equal tendency to worship. Thus, we meet with many men who are moral, but not religious. In like manner, if the organs of the religious sentiments be large, and those of Conscientiousness and Benevolence be deficient, there may be a strong tendency to perform acts of religious devotion, with a great disregard of the duties of brotherly love and honesty. We meet with such characters in the world. The late Sir Henry Moncreiff, minister of St Cuthbert's Parish, in Edinburgh, is said to have described a person, with whom he had had many transactions, in these forcible terms: "He is a clever man, a kindhearted man, and he seems to be a religious man,—in short, an excellent man; only, somehow or other, he is sadly deficient in common honesty." Phrenology enables us to comprehend the combination of qualities which gives rise to such characters. The description indicates large intellect, large organs of the religious sentiments, and large Benevolence, but great deficiency in the organs of Conscientiousness.

According to these views, religion rests on the sentiments of Veneration, Wonder, and Hope, as its foundations. The enlightenment of the intellect serves to direct these sentiments to their proper objects, but does not produce them, and therefore does not produce religion. It is thus impossible that religion itself can be overset or eradicated from the human mind. The forms and ceremonies by which the religious sentiments manifest themselves may be expected to vary in different ages, and in different countries, according to the degree of development of the religious, moral, and intellectual organs, and the state of the intellectual cultivation of the people; but these emotions themselves evidently glow with a never-dying flame, and man will cease to adore only when he ceases to exist.

After you understand that music springs from the organs of Time and Tune, you would smile if I were to assure you that it would perish if the Society of Professional Musicians were dissolved. You would at once discover that this society itself, as well as all the pieces which its members perform, and the instruments which they use, have sprung from the innate love of music in the mind; and that it is mistaking the effect for the cause, to imagine, that when they cease to exist as a society, music will become extinct. The result of their dissolution would be, that the inherent activity of the musical faculties would prompt other individuals to establish other societies, probably on more improved principles; and music would flourish still.

It is equally absurd to mistake churches, articles of faith, and acts of parliament, for the foundations of religion, and to imagine, that, when these are changed, religion will perish. The day was, when religion was universally believed to rest, for its existence, solely on the decrees of Roman Catholic councils and popish bulls, and when the priests assured the world that the moment their church and authority were subverted, religion would be for ever destroyed. But we have lived to see religion flourishing vigorously in nations which disown that authority and church. If the churches and articles of faith now prevalent shall be changed, of which there is much probability, the adherents of them will, after the fashion of the priests of Rome, proclaim that the doom of religion has been sealed; but all men who are capable of looking at the true foundation of religious worship, firmly and deeply laid in the human faculties, will be unmoved by such alarms. They will expect religion to shine forth in ever-brightening loveliness and splendour, in proportion to the enlightenment of the public mind; and they will fear neither infernal nor terrestrial foes.

It would greatly assist the progress of improvement, if a firm conviction could be carried home to the public mind, that religion has its foundations in the nature of man, because many excellent persons might thereby be delivered from the blind terrors in which they constantly live, lest it should be destroyed; and the acrimony of contending sects also, every one of which identifies its own triumph with that of religion itself, might probably be moderated.

The next question that presents itself is, Whether there be any moral or religious duties prescribed to man by natural theology? In answering this question, moralists in general proceed to prove the existence and attributes of God, and to infer from them the duties which we owe to Him as our creator, preserver, and governor. They regard Him as the mighty God, and us as His lowly subjects, bound to fear, tremble, love, and obey Him: I entirely concur in this view when applied to doing the will of God; but it appears to me that it has often led to misconceptions and abuse. Religious duty has, somehow or other, come to be too generally regarded (in the spirit at least in which it is practised, if not in words) as a homage rendered to the Divine Being for his own gratification, the neglect of which he will punish, and the performance of which he will reward. Many persons have a notion of the Divine Being somewhat resembling that of an earthly sovereign, whom they may win and gratify by praises and flattery, and from whose favour they may expect to receive something agreeable and advantageous in return. All this is superstition and error, and it partakes too much of the character of selfishness. I am aware that no rational Christian puts his religious faith and worship into the form of such propositions; but I fear that the spirit of them can be too often detected in much of the religion of the world.

It appears to me that the religious service of the Deity possesses, under the lights of nature, a totally different character.

The existence of a supreme Ruler of the world, is no doubt the first position to be established in natural religion: but the proofs of it are so abundant, so overpowering to the understanding, and so captivating to the sentiments, that I regard this as the simplest, the easiest, and the least likely to be disputed, of all the branches of the subject. If reflecting intellect be possessed, we can scarcely move a step in the investigation of nature without receiving irresistible proofs of divine agency and wisdom. I opened the page 107 first book embracing natural science, that came to my hand, when composing this lecture. It happened to be a Number of the Penny Cyclopædia, which had just been sent in by the bookseller; and I turned up the first page that presented itself (p. 151). It chanced to be one on Bees, and I read as follows: "In many instances, it is only by the bees travelling from flower to flower, that the pollen or farina is carried from the male to the female flowers, without which, they would not fructify. One species of bee would not be sufficient to fructify all the various sorts of flowers, were the bees of that species ever so numerous, for it requires species of different sizes and different constructions." M. Sprengel found that, "not only are insects indispensable in fructifying different species of Iris, but that some of them, as I. Xiphium, require the agency of the larger humble bees, which alone are strong enough to force their way between the stile-flags; and hence, as these insects are not so common as many others, this Iris is often barren, or bears imperfect seeds."

This simple announcement proves to my understanding, incontestably, the existence and presence of a Deity in creation; because we see here an important end, clearly involving design, accomplished by agents altogether unconscious of the service in which they are engaged. The bee, performing, all unconsciously to itself, the work of fructification of the flowers,—and the provision of bees of different weights for stile-flags of different strengths,—bespeak, in language irresistible, the mind and workmanship of an intelligent contriver. And who is this contriver? It is not man. There is only one answer possible,—it is the Deity; and one object of his selecting such a method for operating, may perhaps have been, to speak home to the undertandings of men, concerning his own presence, power, and wisdom. Nature is absolutely overflowing with similar examples.

But there is another species of proof of the existence of a God,—that which is addressed to the poetic sentiments of man. "The external world," says Mr Sedgwick, "proves to us the being of a God, in two ways: by addressing the imagination, as well as by informing the reason. It speaks to our imaginative and poetic feelings, and they are as much a part of ourselves as our limbs and our organs of sense. Music has no charms for the deaf, nor has painting for the blind; and all the touching sentiments and splendid imagery borrowed by the poet from the world without, would lose their magic power, and might as well be presented to a cold statue as to a man, were there no preordained harmony between his mind and the material beings around him. It is certain that the glories of the external world are so fitted to our imaginative powers as to give them a perception of the Godhead and a glimpse of his attributes; and this adaptation is a proof of the existence of God, of the same kind (but of greater or less power, according to the constitution of our individual minds) with that which we derive from the adaptation of our senses to the constitution of the material world." Discourse on the studies of the University of Cambridge, pp. 20, 21.

Assuming, then, the existence of a Deity as demonstrable by means of the work of creation, the next question is, What can we discover of his character, by the exercise of our natural faculties?

In answering this question, I observe, in the first place, that we cannot possibly discover any thing from creation concerning his person, or personal history, if I may use such expressions, because there is no manifestation of these in the external world. If, for example, we were to present a thread of raw silk to an intelligent man. and ask him to discover from its physical appearances alone, the individual characteristics of the maker of the thread, he would tell us that it is impossible to do so, because the object presented to him does not contain one element from which his understanding can legitimately infer a single fact in answer to such a question. In like manner, when we survey earth, air, and ocean, our own minds and bodies, and every page of creation that is open to us, although we perceive thousands of indications of the mental qualities of the Creator, we receive not one ray of light concerning his form of being, his personal history, residence, or individual nature. All conjectures on this subject, therefore, are the offspring of fancy or of superstition.

But we receive from creation overwhelming proofs of his mental attributes. In the stupendous mechanism of the heavens, in which our sun and whole planetary system are but as one wheel, and that so small, that although annihilated, its absence would scarcely be perceptible to an eye embracing the universe,—we perceive indications of power which absolutely overwhelm our imaginations. In the arrangements of physical and animal creation, we discover proofs of wisdom without limits; and in the endowment of our own minds, and the adaptation of the external world to them, we discover evidence of unbounded goodness, intelligence, and justice.

The inference which I draw from these manifestations of the divine character is this: that God veils from us his individual or personal nature, to avert from our minds every conception that he stands in need of us, or of our homage or services, for his own sake; so that we may have neither temptation nor apology for adopting a system of worship, such as we should address to a being whom we desired to flatter or please by our attentions;—and that he reveals to us his moral and intellectual attributes, to intimate to us that the worship which will meet with his approbation, is that which will best carry into execution His will in that department of creation which is placed under the dominion of man as a rational and responsible being. Now, what is this form of service? All creation proclaims an answer! It is acting in the spirit of the Deity, as manifested in his works. If so, natural religion must be progressive in its principles and duties, in correspondence with our increasing knowledge of the will of the Divine Being, expressed in his works; and it really is so.

Theologians often reproach the religion of nature with darkness and uncertainty. They might as legitimately make the same charge against the science and philosophy of nature. Up to a very recent period, indeed, the science of nature was barren; but the reason was, not that in itself it contained no wisdom, nor any elements adapted to the profitable use of man, but that man's ignorance was so great, that he had not discovered how to study that science in its right spirit. As soon as Lord Bacon put him into the road to study it wisely, natural philosophy became munificently productive; and at this hour its stores continue to yield more and more abundant benefits to man, in proportion as they are opened up.

The same history will hereafter be given of natural religion. While men were ignorant of every principle of science, it was most natural in them to ascribe every isolated effect to an isolated power, and to imagine as many deities as there were agencies in the world which they could not reconcile. They saw the river waters rolling in mighty torrents to the ocean;—their Veneration and Wonder were moved by the power displayed, and they imagined a river god as the cause. They perceived the earth yielding spontaneously fruits, and flowers, and herbage, of the richest kinds; they felt the bounty of the gifts, and ignorant of their cause, ascribed them to a goddess, Ceres. They saw the seasons change, and the sun, moon, and planets, present different appearances; and deeply impressed with them uni- page 108 festations of power which these orbs displayed, but ignorant of the cause, they imagined them to be deities themselves. All this was the natural effect of the human faculties operating in profound ignorance of physical causation.

But since science demonstrated that the planets revolve, and rivers flow, in virtue of one law of gravitation, we no longer ascribe each action to a separate deity, but attribute both to one; and our notions of that one are prodigiously enhanced by the perception of a single power extending over such mighty intervals of space, and operating in all according to one uniform law. In proportion, therefore, as we advance in knowledge of creation, we discover proofs of uniformity, combination, mutual relationship, and adaptation, that compel the understanding to ascend to one cause, and to concentrate in that cause the most transcendent qualities. It is thus that our conceptions of the attributes of the Divine Being drawn from nature, go on increasing in truth, in magnificence, and in beauty, in proportion as we proceed in the acquisition of knowledge; and as our rapid progress in it is of recent origin, we may well believe that natural religion could not earlier have presented much instruction regarding the Deity to the understanding or the moral sentiments of man.

But the reproach is made against natural theology, that it is barren also in regard to man's duties. Here the same answer occurs. Natural theology teaches that it is man's duty to perform aright the part which God has allotted to him in creation; but how could he discover what that part was, until he became acquainted with himself and with creation? Natural theology was barren in regard to duties, only because the knowledge of nature, which alone gives it form and substance, had itself scarcely an existence in the human mind. Man had not learned to read the record, and was therefore ignorant of the precepts which it contained. He was exactly in the same condition, in regard to natural religion, in which most of us would be, if we had never received any but a Gaelic Bible. The whole doctrines and precepts of Christianity might be faithfully recorded, and most explicitly set down in it; but if we could not interpret the characters, of what service would the book be to us? It would be absurd, however, to object against the Bible itself, on this account, that it is barren of instruction.

In like manner, whenever we shall have interpreted aright the constitution of the human mind and body, the laws of the physical world, and our relations to it and to God, which constitute the record of our duties, inscribed by the Creator in the book of nature, we shall find natural theology most copious in its precepts, most express in its injunctions, and most peremptory in its demands of obedience. For example: When we know that He has bestowed on man an organ of Philoprogenitiveness, and enabled us to comprehend its uses and objects, every well-constituted mind feels that this gift implies a direct precept from God, that parents should love their children. But when we discover that this is a mere blind impulse, which may egregiously err, and that God has given us intellect and moral sentiments to direct its manifestations, the obligation is instantly recognized to lie on all parents, to use these faculties, in order to attain the knowledge necessary for loving their children according to true wisdom. And what is this knowledge? It is acquaintance with the bodily constitution and mental faculties of children, and with the influence of air, diet, exercise, seasons, clothing, mental instruction, and society, upon them; so that the parents may be enabled to train them in health, to prepare them for becoming virtuous members of society, and to secure their present and future happiness. If any mother, through ignorance of the physical constitution of her child, shall so mismanage its treatment, that it shall become miserable, or die, she has neglected a great duty prescribed by natural theology; because the moment she perceives that God has rendered that knowledge necessary to the welfare of the child, and has given her understanding to acquire it, she is guilty of disobedience to his will in omitting to seek it. The unhappiness and death of the child and her own attendant suffering, are punishments which clearly indicate his displeasure.

I appeal to you who have followed a course of Lectures on Phrenology, and read the "Constitution of Man," and been satisfied with the general truth of the principles unfolded in them, whether you do not perceive these to be duties prescribed in the constitution of nature, by the Creator, to parents, with a command as clear and explicit, and with a sanction as certain, as if He had opened the heavens, and, amidst thunders and the shaking of the universe, delivered to them the same precepts written on monuments of brass! In truth, they are more so; because the authenticity of the tablets of brass, like those of stone, might be disputed and denied by sceptics, who did not themselves see them delivered; while the precepts written in our nature, adapted to the constitution of our faculties, and enforced by the whole order of creation, stand revealed in a record which never decays nor becomes obsolete, and the authenticity of which no sceptic can successfully deny. If the precepts therein contained be neglected by ignorance, or set at defiance by obstinacy, they never are so with impunity; because God in his providence sweeps resistlessly along in the course which he has revealed, laying in the grave the children in whose persons his organic laws have been deeply infringed, rendering unhappy those in whom they have been materially neglected, and rewarding with enjoyment only those in whose minds and bodies they have been obeyed.

Every organ of the body, and every faculty of the mind is a text from which the most Valuable lessons in natural religion might be drawn; lessons thoroughly adapted to the human understanding, true, practical, and beneficial. Natural theology would at once impress on them the sanction of the Divinity, and enforce them, by shewing that He punishes men for their neglect, and rewards them for their observance, in the ordinary administration of his providence. If I am sound in the view which I have laboured to establish, that this world really constitutes a great theatre of causation, adapted to the animal, moral, and intellectual nature of man, so arranged as to admit of his becoming prosperous and happy in proportion as he becomes thoroughly intelligent and moral,—and by no other means;—what a fertile field of precept for the practice of virtue is thus opened up to us! How eloquent, how forcible, how varied, and how instructive, may not the teachers of God's law and God's will then become, when they shall have the whole book of creation opened to them for texts; when every line shall be clear, interesting, and instructive; and when they shall be able to demonstrate, in the Consequences which attend the fulfilment or neglect of their precepts, that they are teaching no vain or fanciful theories, but the true wisdom of God I Conceive for one moment how much of useful, interesting, nay, captivating instruction, might be delivered to a general audience, by merely expounding the functions, uses, and abuses of the various organs of the body necessary to health, and of the organs and faculties of the mind, holding up the constitution of each as a Divine intimation to man, and the consequences of using or abusing each, as solemn precepts from the Divinity, addressed to his understanding and his moral and religious feelings!

In presenting these views for your acceptance, I assume that it is possible to discover important duties by studying the institutions of the Creator; and in the first Lecture, I stated that "it is accordance with the dictates of all the faculties harmoniously combined, which constitutes certain actions virtuous, and discordance with them which constitutes other actions vicious." An objection to this doctrine, however, has been stated in the following words:—"Here we would ask, whose 'enlightened intellect' is referred to in the above passage, or how we can know when our own becomes sufficiently enlightened to be taken as a guide! Is this giving us one moral standard, or many?" I would answer this question by propounding to the objector another. What moral standard does he himself possess? He will probably answer, "the Scriptures;" but I reply that the Scriptures are differently interpreted by different minds; and I again inquire, Whose mind constitutes the standard of infallible interpretation? The Pope answers, that the minds of himself and of his cardinals, acting in council, do so. The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, however, deny the pretensions of the Pope and cardinals, and virtually claim it as belonging to themselves. The Episcopalians, Unitarians, and Universalists, on the other hand, affirm that the Church of Scotland has no more legitimate claim to infallibility in interpreting Scripture, than the Pope. Where, then, is the standard to be found? In my opinion, the decisions of those individuals who possess the largest development of the moral and intellectual organs, and the most favourable combination of them in relation to each other and to the organs of the animal propensities; who also possess the most active temperaments, and who have cultivated all these gifts to the highest advantage, will be entitled to the greatest respect as authorities on morals and religion, whether these be founded on interpretations of God's works, or on interpretations of Scripture. If this standard be imperfect, I know of no other.

Again—If these views be well founded, how unproductive of real advantage must the preaching and teaching of Christianity necessarily be, while the duties prescribed by Nature are ignorantly neglected! Nothing appears to be more preposterous, than for human beings to pray, evening and morning, to their Maker,—"Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven;" and all the while to close their eyes against perception of the means appointed by God for realizing his kingdom and doing his will on earth! So far from the duties prescribed by natural theology being either barren or adverse to Christianity, it appears to me that practical Christianity has remained, to a great extent, unproductive, misunderstood, and comparatively feeble, in consequence of the dictates of natural theology having been unknown and neglected. If I am correct in the single position, that men in whom the coronal region and the anterior lobe of the brain are large, are naturally alive to the truth and excellence of practical Christianity, while those in whom these regions, particularly the coronal, are deficient, are naturally opposed to, or indifferent about it,—how important does it become to obey all the dictates of natural theology for improving the development of the brain, as a preliminary condition, indispensable to the general introduction of the morality of Jesus Christ! The clerical teachers of mankind in all civilized countries are placed at present in a position which few of them understand. The theology which constitutes the distinctive creed of each sect is scholastic and dogmatical, resting on words and interpretations of words based on no natural foundation, and unconnected with any natural science. The discoveries which have been made since these creeds were framed, in Astronomy, Geology, and Physiology, have brought facts concerning physical nature and the nature of man to light, which were never dreamt of by the authors of these formulas of belief, and which yet bear directly on their merits. A knowledge of these sciences is becoming widely diffused among the people, and the effects are already discernible in the United States of America, France, and Germany, where religious discussion is freely maintained. There the ancient formulas are every day falling more and more into disrepute; while no satisfactory substitute for them has yet been introduced. This cannot be achieved until the record of nature be honestly and fearlessly contrasted with that of Scripture, and justice done to both. When will the clergy open their eyes to this fact?