which our reason did not produce." ... "All existence is a
dominion of reason." "The laws of nature are laws of reason, and altogether
form an endless unity of reason; ... one and the same throughout the
universe."
[263] In the same way Mr. Lewes, in criticising the Duke of Argyll's "Reign
of Law" (_Fortnightly Review_, July 1867, p. 100), asks whether we should
consider that man wise who spilt a gallon of wine in order to fill a
wineglass? But, because we should not do so, it by no means follows that we
can argue from such an action to the action of God in the visible universe.
For the man's object, in the case supposed, is simply to fill the
wine-glass, and the wine spilt is so much loss. With God it may be entirely
different in both respects. All these objections are fully met by the
principle thus laid down by St. Thomas Aquinas: "Quod si aliqua causa
particularis deficiat a suo effectu, hoc est propter aliquam causam
particularem impediantem quae continetur sub ordine causae universalis. Unde
effectus ordinem causae universalis nullo modo potest exire." ... "Sicut
indigestio contingit praeter ordinem virtutis nutritivae ex aliquo
impedimento, puta ex grossitie cibi, quam necesse est reducere in aliam
causam, et sic usque ad causam primam universalem. Cum igitur Deus sit
prima causa universalis non unius generi tantum, sed universaliter totius
entis, impossibile est quod aliquid contingat praeter ordinem divinae
gubernationis; sed ex hoc ipso quod aliquid ex una parte videtur exire ab
ordine divinae providentiae, quo consideratur secundam aliquam particularem
causam, necesse est quod in eundem ordinem relabatur secundum aliam
causam."--_Sum. Theol_. p. i. q. 19, a. 6, and q. 103, a. 7.
[264] "Unity of Worlds," Essay ii., Sec. ii., p. 260.
[265] See the exceedingly good passage on this subject by the Rev. Dr.
Newman, in his "Discourses for Mixed Congregations," 1850, p. 345.
[266] See Mr. G. H. Lewes's "Sea-Side Studies," for some excellent remarks,
beginning at p. 329, as to the small susceptibility of certain animals to
pain.
[267] "Philosophy of Creation," Essay iii., Sec. iv., p. 480.
[268] It seems almost strange that modern English thought should so long
hold aloof from familiar communion with Christian writers of other ages and
countries. It is rarely indeed that acquaintance is shown with such
authors, though a bright example to the contrary was set by Sir William
Hamilton. Sir Charles Lyell (in h
|