inaEiivlty of Matter, &c. i 2 r

light the incessant influence of this Beingon the material world in general; let us next

(still

rest as well as motion therefore demonstrate the Creator’samazing, adorable power, presence, goodness? May wenot cry out,

Sic, Pater, in cundlos didis te, commodus ufus !

Is this speculation unpleasant to the rational nature ? or,not founded in reason ?

As to what is said of the agreement of philosophers ;have not some denied any such thing as motion in th euniverse ? some made us mere machines; some deniedthe existence of all immaterial substance ; and some againthe possibility of the existence of matter itself. I verilybelieve they have left nothing undented that can be aproof of natural theology. Must we wait till they agree,to determine whether we have any material or immate-rial substance in us; or perhaps neither of them ? Or isit better to let all things remain in sceptical suspence ?

If this be a reason for doing so now, it will never ceaseto be one. It is really a better method to follow truthwherever we find it, without regard to names; payinggreat men that respect which their noble, industriousdiscoveries justly challenge; yet without sticking closeto some weaknesses perhaps, which are inseparable fromhuman nature; or setting one great name against another.

Sir If Newton’s thoughts on this subject of cohesionare both pious and philosophical. All these things beingconsidered, (fays he) it seems probable to me, that God inthe beginning formed matter in solid, mass, hard, impe-netrable, moveable particles, of such sizes and figures, an,With such other properties, and in such proportion to spaced

as