of God, or the theory of a Divine Providence, in
speaking of historical events. They must be ascribed to certain brute
forces of nature; to certain inevitable laws of history; to the passions
of men, to chance, to fate, to anything and everything: rather than to
the will of God.

No man disagrees more utterly than I do with the latter part of this
language. But I cannot be astonished at its popularity. It cannot be
denied that the theory of a Divine Providence has been much misstated;
that the doctrine of final causes has been much abused; that, in plain
English, God's name has been too often taken in vain, about calamities,
private and public. Rational men of the world, therefore, may be excused
for begging at times not to hear any more of Divine Providence; excused
for doubting the existence of final causes; excused for shrinking,
whenever they hear a preacher begin to interpret the will of God about
this event or that. They dread a repetition of the mistake--to call it
by the very gentlest term--which priests, in all ages, have been but too
ready to commit. For all priesthoods--whether heathen or Christian,
whether calling themselves priests, or merely ministers and
preachers--have been in all ages tempted to talk as if Divine Providence
was exercised solely on their behalf; in favour of their class, their
needs, their health and comfort; as if the thunders of Jove never fell
save when the priesthood needed, I had almost said commanded, them. Thus
they have too often arrogated to themselves a right to define who was
cursed by God, which has too soon, again and again, degenerated into a
right to curse men in God's name; while they have too often taught men to
believe only in a Providence who interfered now and then on behalf of
certain favoured persons, instead of a Providence who rules, always and
everywhere, over all mankind. But men have again and again reversed
their judgments. They have had to say--The facts are against you. You
prophesied destruction to such and such persons; and behold: they have
not been destroyed, but live and thrive. You said that such and such
persons' calamities were a proof of God's anger for their sins. We find
them, on the contrary, to have been innocent and virtuous persons; often
martyrs for truth, for humanity, for God. The facts, we say, are against
you. If there be a Providence, it is not such as you describe. If there
be judgments of God, you have not found out the l