faith. When a philosopher is convinced of the existence of an attractive power in bodies, and has calculated its laws, he believes in it without comprehending its nature.. Do we know how the soul is united to the body? Have we, however, any doubt of this union? We see a musician at a harpsichord, playing a piece of music: to express the first note he must have the will to place a certain finger upon a certain key; another finger upon another key, to express the second; and so successively, to execute a sonata of ten thousand notes. Here are ten thousand acts of the will, which follow each other so rapidly, that individually they are imperceptible. There is no doubt, however, that every touch of a key is, by an express and distinct act of the will, directing the fingers, one after the other, to particular notes. Is it known how the will thus influences each movement of the finger? Has any one conceived the least idea of the nature of this mechanism? Yet, we do not deny the influence of the will on every movement of the body. I do not call to mind where I have read the following reasoning, respecting the mystery of the Trinity; but it appears to me so satisfactory, that I cannot refrain from stating it. I am fully persuaded of the necessity of revelation; that of the Evangelists, founded upon the prophecies, the miracles, and the purity of its doctrine, afford irresistible proofs of its divine origin, and which no other can furnish. I find in the Holy Scriptures this proposition: "There are three witnesses in Heaven, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." From which, as well as from many other passages in the Scripture, I know that there is a distinction made in the Divinity, under the three names of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: and I find these terms sufficiently proper to express what we know of this mystery. I cannot find in the Scripture any information respecting the nature of this distinction, except that the Son, is begotten, and that the Holy Spirit preceeds from the Father and Son. I conclude that there must be something more than a mere nominal distinction, since we are baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; whence we may understand something more than if the command had been given in these terms: "Go and baptize all nations in the name of Jehovah, Elohim, and Adonai." And if nothing more was intended, than that the Apostles were to baptize in the name of God, this would merely have been a vain tautology. tautology. I conclude, moreover, that there are not three distinct Spirits, or there would be three Gods, contrary to what we are taught both by reason and the Holy Scriptures: from all which I infer, that there is in the Divinity something more than a nominal distinction, and something less than a distinction of three separate Spirits; and finding throughout each person singly, or all conjointly, named God, and adored as God, I say with St. Athanasius, "I adore the Trinity in Unity." Although it is impossible to bring this subject abso lutely within the reach of the human understanding, the following illustration may afford some satisfaction. The sun engenders rays; and from the sun and the rays proceed light and heat. Thus God the Father begets the Son; and from the Father and the Son proceeds the Spirit of light and grace. But as the sun is not before the rays, nor the rays before the light and heat, but they are all simultaneous: thus neither is the Father before the Son, nor the Father and the Son before the Holy Spirit; except as to their order or relation to one ano ther, in which respect only the Father is the first person of the Trinity. Among a thousand passages of Scripture which confirm the above arguments, see Genesis i. 1, 26; x. 7. St. Matthew iii. 16, 17; ix 4, 6. St. John, the whole of the first chapter; ii. 24; xiv. 8, and following; ix. 30, and following; xvi. 13, 14, 15; xx. 28; St Paul to the Romans ix. 5; to the Philippians ii. 5, 6; to the Colossians ii. 9; to Timothy I, iii. 16; first St John v. 7, 20. ON THE UNION OF THE SOUL AND BODY. [From the same.] WE see the process of a piece of work in the hands of the weaver; the threads are so regularly arranged, and the colours so disposed, that there results a marvellous production, representing animals, flowers, &c. may it not be in like manner, that the images of things perceived by the soul, are formed in the brain? The different vibrations of fibres, combined in a manner almost infinite, may suffice to represent all objects; and the same variations more faintly repeated, may perhaps serve S 2 to to recal them We may thus compare the soul to a cen tinel on a high tower, whence he descries an immense prospect; whatever the eye can perceive in the extent of this prospect, the soul may see perhaps concentrated in a very small space, by means unknown to us. If a man, born deaf, and having, consequently, not even an idea of the organ of hearing, should observe that a person gave orders to men at a distance from him; if he saw them move in consequence of the influence of these orders, he would not comprehend (having no idea of the motive of speech) by what means this single person could move all the rest. It is thus we cannot compre. hend the influence of the soul on the body; and it may be by means analogous to the instance just mentioned. ACADEMIANA. I RISE OF THE PURITANS. N Sir George Paul's life of Archbishop Whitgift, there is a trifling circumstance related, which is supposed to have given rise to the Dissenters in the reign of Eliza beth. The circumstance is this: The first discontentment of Master Cartwright, (a Fellow of Trinity college, Cambridge, and a celebrated disputant) grew at a public act in that university before queen Elizabeth; because Master Preston, (then of King's college, and afterwards Master of Trinity hall) for his comely gesture and pleasing pronunciation, was both liked and rewarded by her Majesty; and himself received neither reward nor commendation, presuming of his own good scholarship. This his no small grief he uttered unto divers of his friends in Trinity college, who were also much discontented, because the honour of the disputation did not redound unto their college. Master Cartwright, immediately after her "Majesty's neglect of him, began to trade into divers opinions, as that of the discipline, and to kick against her ecclesiastical government; and that he might the better feed his mind with novelties, he travelled to Geneva, where he was so far carried away with an affection of their new new-devised discipline, as that he thought all churches and congregations for governments ecclesiastical, were to be measured and squared by the practice of Geneva. Therefore, when he returned home, he took many excep tions against the established government of the church of England, and the observation of its rites and ceremonies, and the administration of its holy sacraments; and buzzed these conceits into the heads of divines, young preachers, and scholars of the university of Cambridge, and drew after him a great number of disciples and fol lowers. Cartwright afterwards disturbs the state of the university; is recommended to be quiet, but to no purpose; is at last expelled, after having refused to assist at a conference which Archbishop Whitgift offered him. Cartwright afterwards published, in 1591, a book of new discipline, for which he was proceeded against in the Star Chamber. ARCHBISHOP WHITGIFT. THE mention of this great prelate, whom queen Elizabeth used to call her little black husband, gives us an occasion to quote what the judicious and temperate Hooker says of him, which is alone sufficient to wipe off all the foul aspersions cast upon his name by the Puritans. "He always governed," says Hooker, "with that moderation which useth by patience to suppress boldness, and to make them conquer that suffer." LORD BURLEIGH. THIS great statesman was very much pressed by some of the disaffected divines in his time, who waited on him in a body, to make some alterations in the articles and liturgy. He desired them to go into the next room by themselves, and bring him in their unanimous opinion upon some disputed points. They returned, however, without being able to agree. "Why, gentlemen," said he," how can you expect that I should alter any point in dispute, when you who must be more competent, from your situation, to judge than I can possibly be, cannot agree yourselves in what manner you would have me alter it." With respect to the education of children he used to say: "that the unthrifty looseness of youth in this age was was the parents' faults, who made them men seven years too soon, having but children's judgments." "I will never The same great man was wont to say, trust any man not of sound religion; for he that is false to God, can never be true to man." DR. JOHN OWEN. IN the year 1652 this person, who was a zealous Independent, was made vice-chancellor of Oxford," in which office," (says Wood,) "he being also one of the visitors, he endeavoured to put down habits, formalities, and all ceremony, notwithstanding he before had taken an oath to observe the statutes and maintain the privileges of the university; but was opposed in this also by the Presbyterians. While he did undergo the said office, he, instead of being a grave example to the university, scorned all formality, undervalued the office, by going in quirpo like a young scholar, with powdered hair, snake-bone bandstrings, (or bandstrings with very large tassels) lawn band, a large set of ribands pointed, at his knees, and Spanish leather boots, with large lawn tops, and his hat mostly cocked." Yet Wood afterwards candidly says of him, that he was a person well skill'd in the tongues, Rabbinnical learning, Jewish rites and customs; that he had a great command of his English pen, and was one of the most genteel and fairest writers who have appeared against the church of England, as handling his adver saries with far more civil, decent, and temperate language than many of his fiery brethren, and by confining himself wholly to the cause, without the unbecoming mixture of personal slanders and reflection." Dr. Owen was a very voluminous writer of the high Calvinistical cast, but many of his works may be read with profit, particularly his Exercitations on the epistle to the Hebrews, 4 vols. folio. He died in 1683. DR. BENTLEY. . DURING the celebrated controversy between Mr. Boyle and Dr. Bentley, on the subject of the Epistles of Phalaris, some Cambridge wags made the following pun, They exhibited in a caricature Phalaris's guards thrusting Bentley into the tyrant's brazen bull, and this label issuing from the doctor's mouth, "I had much rather be roasted than boyl'd!" |