What neceffity, it is asked, could there poffibly be for fuch a complicated piece of mechanism as this; for fuch a multiplicity of inftruments, and fuch a variety of contrivances, as are here set in motion, to effect one fingle, and, to all appearance, very eafy purpose, the pardon of a few wretched.criminals? Why could not God have done this at once, by one decifive and gracious exertion of mercy and of power; by publishing, for inftance, an act of general indemnity and oblivion for paft offences, on condition of fincere repentance and amendment of life? Is not this a plain, fimple, and natural manner of proceeding, and far more worthy of the wisdom and the majesty of the Supreme Being, than that intricate, operofe, and circuitous kind of process in the work of our Redemption, which the Gospel afcribes to him?

In answer to all thefe fpecious cavils, it might be fufficient to fay, " Who art thou, O

man, that repliest against God?" Shall the finner that is faved, fay to him that redeemed him, Why haft thou redeemed me thus? "As "well might the thing formed, fay to him that " formed it, Why hast thou made me thus * ?” Objections of fuch a nature, and from fuch a

quarter, prove nothing more, than that man is as prefumptuous as he is ignorant and weak.

That the method which God made use of to redeem man by the death of Chrift, is very different from that which a modern Philofopher would have made use of, may be very fafely admitted, without in the least impeaching either the propriety or the wisdom of that method. That God's proceedings are always infinitely wife, is most certain; but he does not conduct himself on the principles of mere human wisdom. "His ways are not as our ways, "nor his thoughts as our thoughts." It is not always in man to perceive the fitness of those means which God makes ufe of to obtain his ends; though there can be no doubt. but they are the fitteft that could have been imagined. Who could have supposed, that the way to exalt Jofeph to the highest pinnacle of worldly grandeur and profperity, was to fell him as a flave to a company of travelling Ifhmaelites * ? What apparent probability was there, that Goliah, the great cham

* In this, and perhaps one or two other places, a few remarks from other authors have, I believe, (in the courfe of my reading many years ago) infenfibly mingled themselves with my own. But who thofe authors were, I cannot at this distance of time diftinctly recollect.

pion of the Philistines, should fall by the hand of a stripling, unused to arms, and furnished only with a stone and a fling? How indignant was the mighty Syrian, Naaman, when he was told, that, in order to be cured of his le profy, he must wash himself feven times in Jordan ? He expected fomething very different from this. 66 Behold, I thought," fays he, "that "the Man of God will furely come out to 66 me, and stand and call on the name of the. "Lord his God, and strike his hand over "the place, and recover the leper. Are not “Abana and Pharphar, rivers of Damascus, "better than all the waters of Ifrael? May "I not wash in them, and be clean*?" reafoned this wife man; and fo would any other wife man of modern times have reasoned on this occafion. But it proved in this, as it will in every other inftance," the foolishness " of God was wifer than men; and the weak"nefs of God was stronger than men†.” He washed in Jordan, and was clean,

So

Nay, even in the ordinary courfe of God's providence, what a number of things do we fee conducted in a manner totally different

*2 Kings v. 116:

+ 1 Cor. i 25.

from

from what one should náturally expect? To inftance only in that daily bread, which is the chief support of life. How comes it to pass, may the disputers of this world fay, that so much trouble and pains are requifite to produce fo effential an article for our fuftenance as this? What occafion can there be, that it fhould go through fo tedious a process, fuch a long train of preparatory operations, before it becomes fit for ufe? How strange does it feem, that the grain, which is to be our food, fhould first of all be buried in the ground; there remain for fome time invifible and ufelefs, and apparently dead §; then spring forth with fresh life, and in a new form; arrive, by

Apparently dead. The facred writers fay, that the grain actually dies and Voltaire, in his Questions fur l'Encyclopedie triumphs not a little in this fuppofed error. But a much better phyfiologift than Mr. Voltaire (I mean Mr. Bonet, of Geneva) affirms, that the pofition may be juftified as philo fophically true. The exterior integument of the grain docs most certainly corrupt and die. It is the germ only, or principle of vegetation, which remains and lives. "L'Enveloppe du graia perit, & de fon interieur fort une plante bien differente de cette enveloppe."

Eai Analytique, &c. par Mr. Bonet, & Bibliothèque

des Sciences, 1771. Prem. part. p. 145.·

• 1 Cor. 2v. 36.

Atticle Agriculture.

flow

flow degrees, to a ftate of maturity, and afterwards employ a prodigious number of hands; undergo a great variety of changes, and affume many different appearances, before

it can be manufactured into that folid fubftance, which affords fo much strength and nourishment to man? Might not Providence have obtained the fame end by much more obvious and expeditious means? Might not our daily bread be rained down upon us at once from Heaven, like the manna of the Ifraelites; or be made to vegetate on trees, as is the cafe in fome parts of the southern hemisphere, where nature has left no other trouble to man but to gather his bread and eat it, whilft we are forced to labour after it through innumerable difficulties and delays? These questions are just as modest and as proper as those we are apt to ask concerning the mode of our Redemption. And as we find that Providence has not thought fit to humour our prejudices, and conform to our ideas, in the one case; why should we expect it in the other? We may, in both cafes, with equal truth and justice, say, "Where is "the wife? where is the fcribe? where is

VOL. II.

D

"the