and elementary principles and affections in which they have their origin. It is quite possible for us to separate the combinations of thought and feeling which exist in our mind into what may be truly called their elementary parts; and by repeating this analytic process, to arrive at conclusions of equal importance and certainty as those which are obtained in the physical sciences by the most rigorous induction.

In connexion with this subject, I may notice an objection which has been more recently made to the utility of moral philosophy. It has been said that this is a science in which no discoveries can ever be hoped to be made, since the rudest clown, in every age of the world, could tell us what it is to know, and feel, and think, and hear, and see, as well as the most skilful and accomplished metaphysician can. This objection, however, proves too much, since it may be said of all sciences that its elementary principles are known equally to all. Are not the numbers and the figures that form the basis of the mathematical sciences understood by many, who cannot tell either the nature or the objects of mathematical reasonings? And is the study of these to be regarded as useless, because the elements of which they are composed are known to the multitude almost as well as to the philosopher? It is so far from being true that the human mind is so narrow in the range of its phenomena as to render an investigation of its operations, with the hope of augmenting the sum of our knowledge, an abortive undertaking, that there is no branch of science more extensive, or which presents more pleasing and useful results than that which it offers to our contemplation.

possesses considerable practical importance, both as it regards our views of the moral government of God in general, and as it relates to the evidence of divine revelation. All the sources of our information, and all the pursuits of life, are valuable only as they can be subservient to an increase of our knowledge of the character and glories of the Creator and Preserver of all; and if a survey of his works and of his ways tends to render our conceptions of him more accurate, or, should it merely serve to shew how greatly we are indebted to the light of the written word, the labour which we undergo, and the attention which we give, are not bestowed in vain.

I shall, therefore, attempt briefly to ascertain what may be known of the character and government of God from the works of creation and providence, or without the light of revelation.

But before entering on the elucidation of these particulars, it may be proper to make a remark or two on the language of the Apostle to which I have referred. The phrase, "that which may be known of God," refers, of course, not to his essence, which is invisible, but to his properties and attributes. That which may be known of a person is that which distinguishes him from all other objects, whether it be his form, or some other characteristic qualities; and that which may be known of God are the qualities and perfections that are peculiar to him. These, we are told, are manifest, or may be ascertained, by those who have not the light of revelation; for God hath shewed them unto them. The accuracy of this interpretation is confirmed by the phraseology of the following verse. By the words, of mind, is by a careful and patient comparison and observation of facts, and by a cautious induction of inferences.

4. Having noticed the process of analysis, it may be proper in this place to make a few observations on the nature of synthesis, as contrasted with it. Analysis * simply signifies, unless it be in geometry, where its meaning is somewhat peculiar, a resolution of any combination, whether of matter or of thought, into its component parts. There is no science in which we have more beautiful illustrations of this process than in chemistry. A single experiment in which any substance is decomposed, and resolved into its constituent elements, impresses its nature and its use upon the mind more effectually than any other mode whatever. Here we see the several substances existing in a compound, which no mechanical force can separate, passing through a certain process by which they are as perfectly removed from each other as if they had never been combined. It is by an analogous process, also called analysis, that we must proceed in every branch of philosophy in ascertaining the simple and general laws on which the complicated phenomena of the universe depend. Before we can come to a conclusion, for example, as to the universality of the law of gravitation, we must previously be satisfied as to the universality of the facts on which it is founded; if the facts are precisely similar in similar circumstances, to the utmost extent of human observation, the most rigid induction entitles us to refer them to the same cause, whose operation is as general as its effects. Analysis, then, is to be considered as affording the means, in certain cases, and in reference to some sciences, of examining more fully the phenomena of nature, and of making the inductions of its laws more perfect.

The method of synthesis, as its name imports, is the opposite of analysis. As the latter consists in the solution of any thing, whether corporeal or mental, into its first elements, so the former, agreeably to its etymological signification, simply means the act of joining together, or combining into one, substances which were before separate. Of this process, also, chemistry affords us the most striking illustrations. When any two bodies, such, for example, as water and common salt, are united together in consequence of chemical attraction, so that neither of them can be separated from each other by any mechanical force, the chemist denominates the process, which has accomplished this result, synthesis.

Having obtained by analysis a knowledge of the general laws on which the phenomena of nature depend, we may safely proceed to carry on our reasonings in the way of synthesis, as to the effects resulting from any given combination of them. One of the chief advantages of this method is, to confirm the convictions

tions, that the Godhead, that is, the unity, the being, and perfections, of the living and true God, are clearly seen in his works, we must ascribe the circumstance of their not having been justly and distinctly recognised to the state of mind of the beholder. In as far as nature reveals the character and government of God, the revelation will of course correspond to the manifestation which he makes of himself in his word. As he is the Author of both alike, our diligent study of both, with the view of knowing more of God, and of our relations and duties in regard to him, must be highly advantageous. Revelation presupposes the exercise of reason and of moral feeling, and the investigation, in proportion to our opportunities, of the great and marvellous works of the Almighty. It addresses man as a being endowed with understanding, gifted with the powers of judgment and reflection, which are adequate, in many cases, for his direction, for pointing out to him his duty by the aid of general principles, by a comparison of circumstances, and by an induction from particulars.

Besides, it is a source of satisfaction to discover, that, on some of the most momentous of all truths, the suggestions of reason and the doctrines of revelation entirely agree. When I find that an analysis of the principles and moral feelings that are inherent in my mind leads to the same conclusion as the requirements of scripture, it may be presumed that my conviction of moral obligation, as unalterable and eternal, will be strengthened. By this means our views of duty, if not enlarged, become more definite. We are more capable of following out the general principles of morality contained in revelation, and of applying with